Full Series Should Barriss Return in Rebels?

I think that Anakin spectacularly missed the point about the Jedi Order: feeling emotions is absolutely A-Okay. Having strong emotional reactions is perfectly understandable and not to be banned or shunned. What the Jedi seek to do is to not let themselves be controlled by their emotions, to find the best possible solution for the situation, for the greatest number of people with the least amount of conflict without their own emotions interfering or influencing that decision. Anakin feeling enraged that the Sand People murdered his mother is not against the Jedi way. Giving into his rage to the extent he wiped out the entire tribe in what is basically a psychotic fugue state... yeah, that's most certainly NOT alright. But it would also be against every human law going in real life too, so not exactly a black mark on the Jedis' record.

 

Anakin supported force at gun point or edge of lightaber agreement. Padme even said what he was describing was a dictatorship and all he said was, if it works. He was more loyal to the Chancellor's Republic and whims, his own lust for greater power, and his over attachment love/lust towards Padme. Forcing people to agree or end all debate with its my way or the highway, with us or against us, join us or die rhetoric is not a democracy its a monarchy/dictatorship/tranny. Anytime Padme wanted to do things through a democracy and via diplomacy to end the war while Anakin got riled up and accused her of sounding like a separatist, he also got annoyed when she asked him to reason with the Chancellor and he told her to make a motion through the senate which was like a screw you - so even if he did know the senate was worthless and useless, thats where he wanted her to go cause he knew it would never amount to anything. Anakin enjoyed serving Palpatine and he liked power and fighting too much. Quite a few times they even show how easy it comes to Anakin to kill someone, often even stabbing through the back. Anakin was not right in the head, one minute he wants to settle down in the countryside the next go genocide an entire group for the Chancellor.

Probably the only difference with the Imperial Senate was that by that time Emperor Palpatine had full control over the senate, which was absolute, so the Senate acted as a vehicle through which the Emperor exercised his autocratic powers. Before then the Senate function as it was intended. The Republic Senate worked for around 1,000 years but during TPM and sometime before, things became bad due to Sidious/Palpatine making sure of that the whole time he was holding various offices and as a Sith apprentice and whatever his master was up to with his own duel identities and this master before him ect. The only thing TPM really showed us that Corporatism and other special interests groups had pull over senators and those that put Valorum in office, could also take him out. Which was was actually happened, but Palpatine was manipulating both sides, those that put Valorum there and those that wanted him out - so no matter what he was gonna profit. The whole time Palpatine was shaking hands with Valorum and smiling, he was secretly stabbing him the back and cursing him. So we know the Sith are behind much of the corruption within the Senate and outside. The Jedi's duty is be sheriffs, and to protect the Republic. But even they got all warped and twisted due to rising plague of the Sith.

If there was no Sith or something like them, then there would be no Star Wars basically.

 

I don't argue that what the dialogue says, I'm just saying that Anakin describing a government where politicians sit down and discuss what is best for their constituents is not what we see later on. I get the feeling that Lucas wanted to foreshadow the Empire with that dialogue, but the Empire is not as Anakin described his ideal system of government. The politicians did not sit down and discuss what was best for the people, Palpatine pretty much unilaterally decided what was best. And Padme says that the Republic does exactly that, but that the "people" don't always agree, when the "people" rarely figured into anything that was depicted in TCW or the PT. We never really saw where the common man stood, except in their opposition to the Jedi and clones as symbols of war during the Ahsoka/fugitive arc, and the Onderon rebels. The "people" I feel was foreshadowing the Rebellion, but there really wasn't any sort of real representation of those common people in the PT era that would later rise in revolt. So when Anakin does he doesn't feel the system works, Padme points to the peoples' disagreement being an issue, when it's really something we never saw represented in the PT-era, instead the Senate itself always seemed to be the issue as a result of corporate influence that Palpatine manipulated.

But I didn't mean to derail this thread and make it about Anakin or politics. I only mentioned Anakin in regards to his fall being extremely irrational. He fell because his wife's life was at stake.

Anakin wants to kill Palpatine when it is revealed that he's the Sith master, but Anakin ultimately defends Palpatine because Palpatine claims to know how to save Padme, which also leads to Anakin betraying Mace. He even falls to his knees and is distressed about what he did, but pleads with Palpatine to help him save Padme and pledges himself to the Sith in exchange. But then literally minutes later he gets up and agrees with Palpatine that once the Jedi learn what has happened, they will kill all of the Senators. Which is a completely baseless belief. At this point I don't know if Anakin is just agreeing with Palpatine to keep him happy, or if the Dark Side is already corrupting his mind into making him completely paranoid and irrational.

Anyway, Anakin goes and betrays the Jedi on Palpatine's order because "only then will he be strong enough with the Dark Side to save Padme." He seems distraught about that and even on Mustafar seems really conflicted and is in tears during certain shots. Then Padme shows up on Mustafar and all of a sudden he's like drunk on power, he's smiling, he's telling Padme that they don't have to run anymore and that he can save her, and that he can overthrow Palpatine, and in the span of like several minutes it seems like he's going from someone doing something horrible as a means to save the one he loves, to completely feeling no remorse for what he's done.

Then Padme ultimately dies, Vader is lead to believe that he is to blame because he killed her in his anger, when giving into anger is something that the Sith always advocate. So realistically you would think that Anakin would go back to being furious at Palpatine and wanting to kill him because knowing how to save Padme is no longer something that Palpatine can dangle over his head, and that the path that Palpatine set him on is the one that lead to Padme dying. Instead he stays on that path, continues to be addicted to promises of power, which is completely nonsense. You can't really reason through why what he had been through beginning with feeling betrayed by Palpatine yet joining him to save his wife, would culminate into 19 years of believing Palpatine's way to be the right way and continuing to serve him even after Padme's death.

This isn't to stimulate a conversation about Anakin, it's merely used to illustrate a point that those that want to know why Barriss is now serving the Empire probably won't get a rational answer that makes sense, it will probably just be a simple "the Dark Side did it" kind of answer. That she's serving Palpatine now and fulfilling the exact role that she didn't want because, well Dark Side. Or Filoni - while not specifically referring to Barriss - tossed out the idea that certain Jedi may have been so corrupted by TCW that they would pledge themselves to the Dark Side in exchange for their lives being spared. Maybe it turns out that Barriss truly is a coward and afraid to die, and pledges to serve Palpatine and his Empire out of fear, but everything after taking those first steps would probably become a messy ball of irrational decision making as it was with Anakin. I wouldn't expect a completely understandable and coherent explanation for how her motives would be twisted 180 degrees.

 

Anakin is not the most relevant example here however, because his entire journey from Jedi hero to Sith Lord was steered and guided by Palpatine with the express purpose that he not only leave the order but join the Sith. Anakin was disillusioned with the Council and would have been whatever Palpatine said but it was the offer of power over death and the salvation of Padme that lead him specifically to joining the Sith instead of simply walking away from the Council and forging his own path completely.

In counterpart, you have Jedi like Qui-Gonn Jinn or Quinlan Vos. Jedi who disagreed with the Council in pretty fundamental ways and were disliked and mistrusted by the Council in turn but never actually turned to the Dark Side. Thus Barriss' disavowal of the Jedi Council does not automatically lead to 'join the Dark Side.' Even the bombing of the temple isn't a real sign of any innate 'Sithness' as she was not acting in her own self-interest or seeking power of her own. So for her to join the Imperials needs more explanation than simply 'she's wacko/evil/Sith now, 'kay?' because the Imperials with their might-makes-right militarism are precisely what she was protesting against. If anything she should in theory become a (lower-case r) rebel if she survived, some sort of guerrilla terrorist type stirring up trouble, somewhat like Cham Syndulla, as I would imagine bombing temples and blowing up innocent people would be a bit of a deal-breaker for real, capital-letter-R Rebels.

Using Dark Side powers and being consumed by emotions etc and falling out of the Jedi path is most certainly a logical progression for her character as left by TCW (how she got there being a whole 'nother story) but signing up as a fully fledged Imperial inquisitor is not. Even if the explanation given is one that we have to justify with 'yep, she's lost the plot' there really ought to be an explanation as to how she ended up joining tyrannical space fascists.

 

I disagree. And I don't see how Qui-Gon is relevant. He disagreed with the council, but was still fundamentally good. Barriss disagreed and was crazy by the end of TCW. She thinks the Jedi have lost their way, and so her solution is to bomb their temple, frame her friend, get the military involved, and have the Jedi ejected from military matters because they shouldn't be soldiers. She had already fallen to the Dark Side and committed an act of murder because the Jedi had lost their way from the light and she opposed it. She became the thing that she didn't want to see the Jedi become. Which sounds familiar, like Luke being at risk of joining Palpatine because he wants to save his friends.

There is literally nothing to suggest a rational turn to the Dark Side. Anakin's fall was in line with how things are described in the OT.

"Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny" (irrational)
"Strike me down with all of your hatred, and your journey toward the dark side will be complete" (irrational)
"Give into your anger. With each passing moment you make yourself more my servant" (irrational)

Why would Barriss be worthy of some kind of rational explanation?

In the OT we are repeatedly told that if Luke attacks in anger, he's at risk of falling to the dark side and joining the very person he despises. That's the whole climax to the OT. We're dealing with a supernatural power that corrupts people. Not rational decision making. If someone murdered my family and shortly thereafter was apprehended, and I had the opportunity to kill this person in vengeance, regardless of my decision on that matter it's not going to fundamentally put me on some dark path and turn me into a tyrant. I would have a motive for wanting that particular person dead in vengeance, but I'm not going to go from that to slaughtering innocent people or becoming a dictator, etc. Yet that's the kind of trend you see the Force attuned characters undergo when they fall. The only sympathetic part of their decision making process is what led them to turn to the Dark Side in the first place, but after that it's nearly incomprehensible. Barriss had already fallen 19 years ago and we already know why she fell. I don't see any more of a reasonable expectation that she should have a more coherent motive than Anakin for serving Palpatine.

The OT already established the Dark Side as more of a drug that twists a person's mind in ways that aren't fully comprehensible.

Luke opposes the Empire and is being trained to defeat Vader and Palpatine, yet Palpatine taunts him that if he strikes a defenseless person down, he'll fall to the Dark Side (from which Yoda warns there is no return). When Luke lashes out at Vader to protect his sister from the Dark Side, he comes dangerously close to falling and even Palpatine sees that and takes the opportunity to once again offer a place at his side for Luke. Nothing had changed. Luke was there to save his father, he got angry to save his sister, but that anger in itself is enough to put Luke at risk of joining Palpatine. There is no rationality to that. At the end of the day you pretty much have to accept that had Luke turned, it would have just been because this supernatural Dark Side power was addictive and he got a taste of it when he got angry, and it put him at risk of going down the dark path and apprenticing himself to Palpatine to get stronger in the Dark Side.

Anakin may have pledged himself to Palpatine to save Padme, but long after Padme's death and long after he should have realized that the Dark Side in fact did not make him the more powerful than any Jedi has ever dreamed (Obi-Wan defeated him and permanently crippled him) Anakin's loyalty still remains to Palpatine and the Dark Side? Why? Addiction and promises of power.

Pong Krell sees a a vision of the future and a new order rising, and he falls to the Dark Side to save his life and become apprentice to Dooku.

Filoni has mentioned the possibility of Jedi pledging themselves to the Dark Side following TCW in order to save their lives.

But their is a difference between a characters motive for joining the Sith because they had their arm twisted and gave into fear, and what ultimately sells them on the ideology and keeps them on that path. The prior can be rational, the latter has always been shown to be irrational.

Luke lashes out and becomes aggressive to kill the threat to his friends (rational); Dark Side tempts him to join Palpatine (irrational "Dark Side did it" explanation)

Anakin wants to kill Palpatine but pledges himself to Palpatine to save Padme (rational); Anakin continues to serve Palpatine loyally long after Padme's death, after being defeated by his master, and after being convinced that his actions were directly responsible for Padme's death (irrational)

Pong Krell turns on Republic because he's a coward and wants to save his own life (rational); ensuing BWAHAHAHA evil moments (irrational)

Barriss wants the Jedi removed from positions of leadership in the Republic military and so commits an act of terrorism, frames a fellow Jedi, and brings the Republic military and judicial system into opposition with the Jedi (rational); the aggressiveness here leads her down a dark path that one would probably be able to safely assume would be addictive as it was for all the other characters, and so that's all the explanation I would expect. She might have had a noble goal in restoring the Jedi to the role of peacekeepers, but she gave into anger and fear. If that can put Luke in a position where he is at risk of joining his enemy for no other reason than he got angry and tasted the power of the Dark Side, why should it be any different for Barriss? Why should she be above it?

 

The difference is between joining the Dark Side... and joining the Empire. The former makes total sense for Barriss' character development, the latter not so much - they are not synonymous, especially as Barriss' opposition to the Jedi's taking military roles was because she didn't feel they should be soldiers, they should not be resorting to force of arms and 'aggressive negotiations'... which is exactly what the Empire is all about: ruling by military might and fear. The most logical progression for Barriss IS as a villain of some sort, but NOT one who works actively for the Empire. Kind of an extremist, violent terrorist (blowing up a temple full of innocent people) as opposed to the Rebels who go for military targets (the Death Star.) People have made the claim that the heroes of Rebels are basically terrorists - Barriss being an actual terrorist would help to put that in perspective - the lines they would not cross.

An independent Barriss-versus-everyone would still be just as personal an opponent for Ahsoka as Barriss-the-Inquisitor. The parallel would still work just as well: two friends, both left/cast out of the Order, one remains truly heroic - the other is an insane Dark Side terrorist bomber.

 

Sadly, I agree with that. It's a perfect opportunity to show that there is so much more going on than JUST Imps-vs-Rebels (and that there can be good and bad on both sides, or neither side) but the odds are on yet more 'Eeevil Imperials vs goody two shoes Rebels.' Shame really.

 

I don't know that it's so much a case of her joining the Empire as her joining the Emperor.

It's a hypothetical scenario, but what if Luke had turned, either in ESB or ROTJ? He'd apprentice himself to either Vader or Palpatine and help maintain order via the Empire. But I don't think the temptation of joining the Sith rests with believing in the ideology of the Empire (I think that comes later after a desire for absolute control is instilled in the apprentice as a natural byproduct of desiring more power). I mean Luke even says in ANH that he hates the Empire.

I think the temptation in joining Palpatine rests with getting a taste of the Dark Side and then realizing the Palpatine is the person that can teach him to master it. The Sith Master is just a means to an end to him. And that temptation is strong enough to tempt Luke to apprentice himself to the very guy responsible for the regime that is trying to kill his friends, left him without parents growing up, killed his aunt and uncle, etc.

For Barriss, I would expect it to be a little different. Luke was to be Palpatine's apprentice and potential successor. If Barriss is Inquisitor, then there aren't any promises of holding absolute power, since unlike Luke and the potential to become a Sith Lord and someday rule the Galaxy, Barriss is pretty much stuck in a position of service indefinitely with no real potential to climb the ranks. It is my assumption, but I think that her reasons for agreeing to serve Palpatine are going to merely be fear, as it was for Krell. Otherwise I don't know why Filoni would throw out the possibility of Jedi agreeing to serve the Empire after TCW in exchange for their lives. I mean, we know nothing about the other Inquisitor in the trailers, but maybe he's an ex-Jedi too?

There was an interview where Filoni both mentioned that Barriss was not executed and then also mentioned the possibility of Jedi bartering for their lives by joining Palpatine. Then more recently Filoni pretty much gave it away that Barriss is alive and will meet Ahsoka again but wouldn't go further than that. So I'm assuming that the angle of cowardly Jedi that falls to save their own life is going to be the angle that they play for Barriss, but it's just my guess.

As for Barriss becoming what she hates, I think she already did that in TCW. She fell to the Dark Side because she was so disgusted with the Jedi for losing their way from the light.

Hell as an Inquisitor, she's not actually a soldier. She's rooting out dissidents opposing the legitimate government. Once corrupted, she might see herself as a peacekeeper once more, under the new regime.

 

There is still the question of why Barriss would join the Empire OR the Emperor though. Her motives are warped but in their own way altruistic, she isn't seeking power of her own as is the Sith way, and which was the bait offered to Luke by both Palpatine AND Vader separately (overthrow the other and rule together with the one still standing.) Barriss wasn't ever after personal power, even after she went off the deep end, and given how far she went to prove her point she's no coward. For her to die rather than join the Empire would be totally in character UNTIL we hear otherwise.

Like I say, I am not saying Barriss would never turn, ever. But I do think we deserve to know why.

 

I don't see Barriss serving the Empire / Emperor as a real issue anymore. At first, I didn't think it was likely that she'd serve the evil she wanted to prevent, but we have to remember that she is a traitor and a terrorist. She may have lingered in prison for years, all of which, Palpatine could have been manipulating her and seducing her into working toward wiping out the Jedi. Sidious was able to convince Anakin that all the Jedi had to be wiped out, including Obi-wan, Barriss may have broken even easier. She had no master to turn to, no guidance, either the Sith Lord or politician in Palpatine could have swayed her. If she is indeed an inquisitor, she may now believe the Jedi are evil and the Empire provided the order to manage the chaos and corruption that existed during the Clone Wars...

 

She was going to let Ahsoka die and denied having any responsibility in the bombing until Anakin caught her with possession of Asajj's lightsabers. I would say that was very cowardly. She only confessed when she was cornered, and then tried to bring the whole Jedi Order down with her saying they should all be put on trial too. Again, something I would consider desperate and cowardly.

She wasn't some noble crusader trying to expose the Jedi from wrong doing, she was framing the Jedi for a wrongdoing they didn't commit, and driving a wedge of mistrust between the Republic and Jedi and wanted to let Ahsoka take the fall. Had everything gone to plan, nobody would know of Barriss' involvement.

 

Eh... different strokes I guess. I still don't buy Barriss as an Imperial. Dark Side? Sure. Fully fledged, jackboots-and-RP-accent space fascist? Not really. And I think introducing a character who is bad without being an Imperial could only be of benefit to the series. But we shall see... give her some really juicy scenes with Ahsoka and I won't be too fussed who she's working with.

 

She already does have a charming British accent. Perfect for being Imperial.

Though the British accent = Evil, and American accent = Good trope is annoying.

 

The sad thing about Barriss is that she has no purpose left, nothing to believe. Like Anakin Skywalker, she turned away from her whole previous life. It would be all too realistic (and tragic) if she started serving the person who gave her new purpose, just like the Empire gave Vader a purpose. But you are right that showing the conflict in her could be very interesting (if that is what you meant with her being a bad Imperial). It would give the show some much needed depth.

 

Well originally I meant she could work as a villainous/antagonistic character who isn't actually an Imperial. To show that even in Star Wars not all bad guys are British dudes with RP accents who work for an evil Empire (we get that quite a lot.) But seeing her as an Imperial who doesn't actually believe in them and is using their resources for her own agenda would be pretty fun too. Shades of grey, as it were - showing that the likes of Tarkin and ANH-era Vader with their militaristic rule-through-fear are just one school of thought and that some Imps can be more moderate.

 

On the other hand, she was a fanatical terrorist. She would be a rather odd choice for a "moderate" Imperial. Kallus and Tua seemed more suited for the role of sensible Imperial.

 

She blows up temples. Tarkin? Blows up planets. She's pretty restrained by Imperial standards. Which is why my first choice (if I had any) would have been to have had Barriss as a 'third wheel' type character. She fights the Imperials (like our heroes do) but crosses lines they won't (blowing up temples, with people inside.) To show that you can have bad people who aren't Imperials.

But mostly I just don't want her to be just another drone quoting Imperial/Sith dogma all the time. To have joined the Empire and/or the Inquisition because for whatever reason she has actually come to genuinely believe it's for the best, not because big bad Palpatine has brainwashed her... because that's edging far too close to certain that she'll 'wake up' just before she dies. Which would just be... bleurgh. The poor girl was already mishandled terribly in joining the Dark Side (''You remember Ahsoka's BFF? Yeah, she's a terrorist now. Because drama!''), the least she deserves is someone NOT making a hack job of turning her back too.

 

Well, Tarkin is a sociopath, a special type of crazy.

Barriss seems more ... emotionally unstable? She is not such a cold bastard as Tarkin is. But her instability doesn't lend itself to a more "moderate" character, unless that moderation is only superficial and the crazy eventually bubbles to the surface. Blowing up some innocents seems to be no biggie to her (and I wouldn't call a character that does this restrained either, or otherwise we could even call Vader "restrained" because he is not as sadistic as Sheevy).

What about sharkhead Inquisitor? He could be our moderate Imperial.

Absolutely agree. Show us that she is an individual with her own thoughts.

 

In fairness it would be quite an interesting twist to have big old shark-faced pointy-teeth menacing dude being the (relatively) 'good' cop freaked out by some delicate, feminine little lunatic 'bad cop', if just for the appearance/personality juxtaposition.

 

A bit like in the later parts of the Order Of The Stick webcomic - Greysky City - the big half-orc man is the smart leader of the Thieves's Guild, the petite human woman is the thuggish enforcer.

 

Not aware of that particular example but yes that kind of thing. I would imagine being an Inquisitor requires at least a certain level of brain power and if Bruce and Probably-Barriss do work as a pair then wrong-footing suspects by making the big dude 'brains' and the petite lady the 'brawn' would certainly be a decent interrogation technique. And in the trailer of S2 there is that one brief shot of Probably-Barriss booting Ahsoka (I think?) out of the way without much hassle...

 

Also who knows what kind of extreme physical/mental/psychological torture/manipulation that she may have been subjected to in the Post-TCW years. We don't really have enough context to judge her being an Inquisitor (assuming that that even is her of course) yet.

 

Personally if she really HAS to be an Inquisitor (which as you quite rightly say is not yet confirmed) I would actually prefer her to have become so of her own free choice rather than because she was tortured/brainwashed/otherwise mind-whammied into doing it. As much as it doesn't really make a lot of sense to me for her to sign up with the Imperials I would prefer she makes an illogical decision under her own mind rather than being reduced to a literal puppet. Because frankly that just smells off trying to dodge actually developing the character properly and just stripping her right down to being a plot device instead. The angst is all on Ahsoka because now her BFF is a baddie whilst Barriss just gets turned into a mindless zombie and (probably) killed off so Ahsoka can now save her, kill her or both (Barriss dies in Ahsoka's arms... with her 'real' personality coming back just as she does. Bleurgh.)

Barriss actually willingly embracing the Dark Side/Empire would at least give her an actual choice and agency and could be genuinely interesting to see how she warps her own logic/principles into believing working for the flipping Sith is the right moral choice instead of having all that taken away from her.

 

She may serve as an Inquisitor simply because she blames the Jedi for the war and fall of the Republic. What I find would likely be difficult for her is if she knows the identity of Vader, considering Anakin beat her in a duel and brought her to justice. That would be an interesting twist - Ahsoka may know its Anakin, she reveals it to Barriss, and Barriss shifts in the battlefield. She may be engaging Ahsoka, and turns to engage Vader instead. Part of me wants to see the good in Barriss once again, perhaps she could sacrifice herself to allow for Ahsoka to exit the fight with Vader, which I'm sure is planned. The Ahsoka vs Vader duel is inevitable, so Ahsoka needs an exit considering she can't truly win, and Barriss needs a conclusion.