Saga Theology of the dark side

i found this at http://peace-passion-reylo.tumblr.com/post/141720193983/the-theology-of-the-dark-side-star-wars


it's the first time to my knowledge that someone has aimed to legitimise the dark side instead of demonising it. what do you guys think?


The Theology of the Dark Side (Star Wars)

ms-qualia:

@narrativeninja, now you’ve done it. Continuing the conversation with @typhoid–mary
Organized in bite-sized fragments that sort of built upon another. I’m going to use a comp lit approach and mythology more than Star Wars as a source, in part because the EU is nerfed. And for other reasons I hope I make clear.
I.

Everything I’ve seen suggests that deep study of the Force is a religion that requires mentorship and initiation as opposed to independent study. Everyone who uses it has, at least, seen it used. Rey has heard of Jedi and the Force, as has Luke and Anakin. They can each use it really quickly after seeing it. But they must see it first, and then it looks like they don’t just get to use it without it being within a practice. It must be experienced and practiced to be understood.
So by its nature and because the writers are intentionally a bit vague, we won’t be able to fully understand what the Force is. We’d have to feel it. We’d have to do years of training.
This is an important characteristic of the Force.
II.

What the Jedi say about the dark side

• It is concerned with negative emotions
• It is evil
• It is seductive
• It is easy

What the Sith talk about:

• Power
• Order
• Emotions
• Attachment
• Strength
• Understanding

The Jedi might be right, but I don’t think the Sith are lying about their experience of the dark side. How it feels. And since feeling the Force is what you do to use it (even as a light side user) we should not ignore that.
III.

Obi-Wan: A Jedi can feel the Force flowing through him.
Luke: You mean it controls our actions?
Obi-Wan: Partially. But it also obeys your commands.​

We’re told the Force controls us before we’re told we can control it. I think this is an important characteristic of it.
IV.

Narratively, it’s a very very old Apollonian and Dionysian (or chthonic) conflict, with the Sith being on the chthonic side (chthonic meaning earth Gods, the children of Gaia and/ or having to do with the underworld). From the Apollonian and Dionysian wiki page:

The content of all great tragedy is based on the tension created by the interplay between these two.​

Kylo Ren’s murder of his father is absolutely played as a tragedy. That’s the structure of his part of the story so far.
V.

Anakin, if one is to understand the great mystery, one must study all its aspects, not just the dogmatic narrow view of the Jedi. If you wish to become a complete and wise leader, you must embrace…a larger view of the Force.
- Palpatine (emphasis mine)​

Chthonic deities were the deities of everyday life and rituals (like harvest and death and all that). Eventually, mystery religions sprang up around them.
Unlike Christianity, which was concerned with believing the correct thing, mystery religions didn’t tend to focus on believing one correct thing. Theology was not the point. Consistency of theology from believer to believer was not important.
The cult of Persephone was a mystery religion centered around the myth of Persephone’s abduction. It was not told orally. You walked through it, achieved different levels of understanding, and it was revealed to you as you were ready for it. But the experience of the rituals was primary. The emphasis was on the experience, not on the words you attached to them.
By going through the motions of a ritual, you are expressing and experiencing something important about the universe that can’t be talked about in a rational way and can’t be communicated except by experience.
VI.

Jung did a lot to try to re-create mystery religions. A lot of literary people also became fascinated with them around the same time as Jung.
If you want a real dive into it, look at the collective unconscious, shadow, and anima / animus.
Essentially, he thought these stories served a function in people’s lives. There’s this idea we are all acting out a collective drama that we draw on, but which also acts through us (SOUND FAMILIAR?). This is a really similar set of logic that led to theory around monomyth (without which there’d be no Star Wars).
Star Wars is drawing on a deep well of already established symbolic language. Like, you make something well using this structure and these ideas, you’re calling on ideas kids in our culture were breastfed on. We might not know what this voodoo is, but we know what it tastes like.
VII.

I personally believe that the murder of one’s Master or one’s father figure is a mystery of the dark side. It is a ritual. They are acting out something about the nature of the universe they are in. It’s a sacrament. An outward sign of an inner state, and of a higher truth about the universe they are in.
It calls to mind, for me, the power struggle between Kronos and his children. Uranus fathered Kronos, who castrated his own father and deposed him. To prevent that, Kronos devoured his own children. Zeus freed them, then castrated and killed his own father. That’s right after the creation myth. It says something about families and how they believed the cosmos worked.
Kronos is not usually classified as chthonic, but he’s a son of Gaia. His mythology is wrapped up in the duality of death and fertility. He fits the bill.
VIII.

Adam Driver did a lot of physical training for the role. A lot. Like, more than strictly needed for the look of the character.
That makes sense to me, and I can’t tell you why for the life of me. I imagine going on a run. I imagine my legs aching. I imagine doing it every day for a while, to the point where it’s hard to think. It’s inexpressible what going running is like. I can say it hurts, or that occasionally there’s a runner’s high, but I can’t tell you what it’s like. You can recognize it if you see me do it, though. It’s quale.
IX.

Qualia are a mystery on which expressible things are built. I can’t tell you what red is, but if you can perceive it, we can both point to it. And that’s what every other communication is built upon, not logic but recognition. It’s why acting works at all, because someone can express the inexpressible by putting themselves and us through an experience. Experience and recognition are fundamental, not logic.
Theater was a ritual in ancient Greece. A ritual purification, which everyone felt they needed after they had decades of constant war. It was a mass ceremonial grieving. We all can talk about these things because we have seen Star Wars. We now have this tool, a Kylo Ren, to act out something we have all experienced but could not express.
It is not a coincidence art therapy is suggested as a treatment for PTSD and moral injury.
Reason means nothing if we can’t get down to common understanding, and that’s usually built upon experience.
And if we both understand it, and see that all reason is built upon it and is depending on it, we can start talking derisively about the Jedi and their lack of understanding already. That’s the mindset, I think.
X.

To directly answer the question in your tags, read Killing From the Inside Out, especially the sections on how sex and violence were viewed. Essentially, the Greeks viewed sex as inherently an act of conquering and did not so much divide things into masculine and feminine so much as lover and beloved: whoever was penetrating and whoever was being penetrated respectively.
Yes, they extended this to the battlefield. My goodness, the description of murdering people was eroticized. Sex, creation, and death are linked by power and passion.
Later Christian theology drew the same parallel, and said in order for there to be just war, holy war, there had to be killing without passion. Passion was sin. They similarly demanded that sex within marriage also be without passion. Like, literally. Passion in bed or in killing either kind was viewed as a pollutant, and of a similar nature to one another. So what you were supposed to do is, within holy matrimony, somehow practice sex without getting lost to lust. And within the context of holy war, a just war, you could theoretically kill without passion.
And we all know how realistic it is to **** without arousal, right? Priests were forbidden from either marrying or participating in war because the church did not seriously buy this **** either. The Church had some daft-ass theology right around this time.
It’s not much better when the Jedi try saying similar things.
Knights Templar were monastic knights, who practiced a highly, highly ritualized and regulated lifestyle to ensure they could conduct holy war without being lost to sin. Also, by the way, knights templar had a lot of rituals which have been compared to, you guessed it, mystery religions.
This is what asceticism has to do with the Jedi. Also, Kylo Ren’s surcoat looks an awful lot like a Knight Templar’s. But I’m sure that’s just a coincidence, right?
XI.

I can make an argument from text and from influences, so I did. It’s fun, cathartic stuff. Just keep in mind, just because I can find evidence for it in text doesn’t mean the writers meant it. I am sure they meant to use monomyth and Apollonian vs Dionysian conflict. The baggage that comes with that (most of that above) is a feature, not a bug. It means they don’t have to spend forever on theology because we already know the theology. It permeates our culture. They can leave it in the background and focus on the relationships.

 

This is great frared....I need to read it again

 

Kylo Ren is dressed after how Siths were dressing :
in full black.

Jedi knights as the name says,are those that Lucas I think makes to resemble the Knights.
Since Jedi knights are also avoiding passions,they consider these passions to lead someone to the dark side.
And the leader of Templar knights was called grand master,as the leader of the Jedis is also called grand master - and we have Grand master Yoda.

 

IMHO it shouldn't be made unnecessarily ambiguous.

Dark side theology: The needs of the one or the few outweigh the needs of the many.

Light side theology: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one or the few.

In essence the dark side is selfish and its users display militant ignorance, a definition of "evil" by Scott Peck I for one subscribe to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil

 

i don't think utilitarianism is the same thing as theology...

maybe you could talk about values for dark and light, which are tied in with ethics and also tied in with how you relate to the divine. but if the empire is a political expression of the dark side (i'm not sure that is true), surely creating a whole system of government is about many??!!

i am only reading things, i'm not currently having many thoughts of my own, but i think catharsis has to do with it. the jedi lack it. they only have discipline. the Dionysian and the Apollonian can't exist without each other, i don't think. we need excess and austerity equally.

 

darth_frared wrote

maybe you could talk about values for dark and light, which are tied in with ethics and also tied in with how you relate to the divine. but if the empire is a political expression of the dark side (i'm not sure that is true), surely creating a whole system of government is about many??!!

In this case I'd just quote Yoda who, IMHO, wrapped it up beautifully:

LUKE Vader. Is the dark side stronger?

YODA No... no... no. Quicker, easier,
more seductive.

Example: It's quicker, easier and more seductive to destroy a building. Try erecting one and it's all the opposite. We could apply this to all walks of life, doing the right and good thing will always be more difficult but so much more rewarding in the end.

And the Empire merely took over an already established government (the Republic), but one I'm confident of, where only a few were privileged while the rest was condemned to austerity.

i am only reading things, i'm not currently having many thoughts of my own, but i think catharsis has to do with it. the jedi lack it. they only have discipline. the Dionysian and the Apollonian can't exist without each other, i don't think. we need excess and austerity equally.

I'd say the Jedi definitely needed catharsis. I absolutely agree with Palpatine when he mentioned "a dogmatic narrow view" (but while his observation is correct, we must wonder how much if ever he self-reflected the dogmatic narrow ways of the Sith?). The Jedi Order had become a petrified, dogmatic organization with little room for reformation. It had to renewed, one way or the other.

 

Couldn't have said it better.

 

it may be easier to destroy, the thing is that destruction in itself makes room for the new. the jedi order, like you said, are petrified, they need renewing and i have always thought that, had they allowed anakin to do his thing and not denied him everything (this is a simplistic reading perhaps), he would have been their reformer thus bringing balance to the force.

in eastern traditions, the aspect of destroyer and builder of worlds is both present in the divine. we need to preserve but also to make room for new.

 

darth_frared

I wholeheartedly agree. The destruction of the Jedi Order made room for something new, less dogmatic and open-minded to develop. But to do so required some "necessary evil".
If we look at Joseph Campbell and the Monomyth / Hero's Journey that's the ultimate goal of the hero. In that sense both Einstein and George Lucas were heroes in their particular fields of expertise, but they didn't need to use lethal force to accomplish that.

This PT aspect continues to cause me considerable discomfort. Now, the Force is created by all living beings, but IMHO killing any living being cannot ever and possibly be the "will" of the Force.
Yet the prophecy of the Chosen One and Lucas' comments about the prophecy made it abundantly clear, that restoring balance to the Force came with those terrible side effects (millions or billions of living beings dead).

 

That's an apt description of the PT Jedi order. The needs of the few (core worlds, Jedi), outweigh the needs of the many (outer rim, slaves, Clones).

But yes, this theology is also of the Sith.

Of the Force-Users, only Luke Skywalker can be argued to fit this description. Everyone else is elitist.

 

if it's any help Lt. Hija i think we can read the destruction of the jedi order metaphorically. i don't think anyone advocates for murder of a group of people.

in my alternate view, reformation and reconciliation with the dark side would be possible but it involves rebirth. in a way, i guess, the jedi massacre induces the rebirth very literally. it is iffy and problematic, i agree.

 

dARTh Pevra

I think the protection of the Senate member worlds involves the protection and well-being of several billions of people, not just a "few".

And no, of all the non-Sith Force users it was especially Luke Skywalker who felt that the needs of the few (his friends) outweighed the need of the many (the Alliance's cause).

BEN Patience.

LUKE And sacrifice Han and Leia?

YODA If you honor what they fight for
... yes!

Of course, the delicious irony is that "patience" which looks like a Jedi trait is actually what the Sith both in the OT and PT are better capable of mastering than the Jedi, so this one can't be a "Jedi exclusive".

 

The PT didn't give me the impression that the Jedi cared all that much about Regular Joe. I see them save queens and chancellors, but when it comes to save slaves they are all "We are not here to save slaves". Anakins mom also wasn't saved or all the others on Tatooine. Later they throw the clones to the wolves which we of course know are sentient, feeling beings (TCW).

Even Yoda admitted the future is always in motion. It fits the behavioural pattern of the PT Jedi that they're quick so sacrifice someone like Han Solo. Letting his friends die wouldn't save the future imo. I don't think Luke would have walked away from that psychologically, the guilt of leaving his friends to die would probably have lead him straight to the dark side. Yoda's wisdom sometimes leaves a lot to be desired.

 

once the jedi sign up to become part of the republic's defense, they are compromising their own values massively. that doesn't make a massacre anymore palatable but they are basically delivering themselves to palpatine's knife.

i prefer the OT yoda because he's jsut that little bit more whacky, but both is and obi-wan's reasoning is still not where i'd like it to be.

 

The whole concept of the force is silly. In Dark Disciple characters change sides quickly. The sides do not make sense. Why can't I use the dark side to do good?

 

i think that is why i made the thread because i'm interested in a reading that isn't about demonising. i don't think THE FORCE is inherently a moral authority.

 

@darth_frared Well then shouldn't the thread be about the Force in general? Not just the Dark Side?
I am/was interested in starting a thread/essay about the Force and the sides but nothing ever came of it.

 

Jedi cannot use the Force for evil, but trying to use it as good, because that creates shades of gray and that is pushing the Force out of balance. The Jedi essentially did that during the Clone Wars with disastrous results. I'll re-post what I said earlier.

Here is what was said in "Shroud Of Darkness".

EZRA: "Yoda, you're powerful. You must know a way to destroy Vader and his Inquisitors."

YODA: "Padawan, thousands of Jedi once there were. Then came war. In our arrogance, join the conflict swiftly we did. Fear, anger, hate. Consumed by the dark side the Jedi were."

EZRA: "Was it wrong for the Jedi to fight? Is it wrong for me to protect my friends?"

YODA: "Wrong? Hmm. A long time, fought I did. Consumed by fear I was, though see it I did not."

EZRA: "You were afraid?"

YODA: "Yes, afraid. Hmm, surprised are you? A challenge lifelong it is, not to bend fear into anger. There's still a way."

EZRA: "Yeah, but Master Yoda, how are we supposed to win if we don't fight back?"

YODA: "Win? Win, hmm. How Jedi choose to win, the question is."

EZRA: "We already chose. We're going to fight."

What Yoda was saying is that the Jedi acted out of fear when they went to Geonosis and that fear is what fueled them during the war. Some of the Jedi became consumed by anger and hate, as we saw with Mace and Barriss. But overall, the Jedi lost their way because they went in to fight to win. Luke wins by stopping the fight against Vader. Ezra thinks that he has to fight to win, but the way to win is what is important.

This is true here. The Jedi cannot fight fire with fire, as that only burns everything. The Jedi must not use fear, anger and hate because it will turn them evil. That's how the Sith came about. They wanted to use the dark side to rule the Republic, but it would come at a high price.

"As evil begins to take over, it pushes the Force out of balance. It's easier to succumb to evil than it is to be a hero and try to work things through on the good side. Evil is inherently more powerful—it doesn't have the burden of worrying about other people. What Luke sees in Darth Vader at the end of ROTJ is something that I thought was worth understanding: the idea that Darth actually was a very good person. Except he's slightly more powerful than other people and when you get into that situation, your ability to do evil is much easier to come by."

--George Lucas, AOTC DVD Commentary.

"One of the issues in all of this is the bad guys think they’re good and Lord Sidious thinks he’s bringing peace to the galaxy because there is so much corruption and confusion and chaos going on and now he’s going to be able to straighten everything out which maybe true but the price the galaxy is going to have to pay for it is way too much."

--George Lucas, ROTS DVD Commentary.

And so that's what happened. The Sith of the past took over the universe and brought about oppression, tyranny and fear all because they believed that the dark side was not a dangerous thing to be feared, but to be embraced. They only cared about power and control. The Jedi fought back because they knew it was not their place to rule, but to help others.

The Jedi cannot go to Tatooine to free slaves, because they have no authority there. Nor does the Republic. That's why it is controlled by the Hutts and the Jedi had to seek permission to use the Hutts hyperspace lanes to fight the war. The Jedi can no more go to Tatooine to free slaves, than the US Military can go in and rescue that American in North Korea who got himself in trouble with the law. The Jedi can only do what the Republic gives them leave to do and no more than that.

And as to Han and Leia, the point is that they were willing to sacrifice themselves for Luke. Leia even tells Luke to run away, that he's walking into a trap and Han takes another beating because he's discovered that they're bait for Luke.

LEIA: "What about Han?"

LANDO: "Vader's giving him to the bounty hunter."

LEIA: "Vader wants us all dead."

LANDO: "He doesn't want you at all. He's after somebody called Skywalker."

HAN: "Luke?"

LANDO: "Lord Vader has set a trap for him."

LEIA: "And we're the bait."

LANDO: "Well, he's on his way."

HAN: "Perfect. You fixed us all pretty good, didn't you? My friend!"


LEIA: "Luke! Luke, don't - it's a trap! It's a trap!"

They're willing to die for Luke, if it means that he is safe. That's what honoring his friends and what they fight for means. They've gone into the war knowing that they'll die and they're prepared to make that sacrifice. Being a Jedi means that you have to be willing to give up people for the greater good.

 

If a person chooses to sacrifice himself for the greater good, I have utmost respect for that choice. But when a person chooses to sacrifice others for the greater good, they are on a very slippery slope. That way lies justification for all manner of evil.

 

well, that is true, perhaps.

i've been pondering the dark side for some time now and i think it has its own merit but of course, you could say that the way the movies portray it, it's corrupt.

 

I agree that I would have rather liked to see the Jedi in the PT being on an "idealistic crusade" to free slaves, but as Darth-Sinister has explained, Qui-Gon Jinn neither had the power nor the authority to do so on Tatooine.
In general - and I think TPM got that message across rather early and clearly - the Jedi were first and foremost mediators. Mediation was their way to resolve conflicts (and it would have served them better had it stayed that way).

Darth_Pevra wrote

Even Yoda admitted the future is always in motion. It fits the behavioural pattern of the PT Jedi that they're quick so sacrifice someone like Han Solo. Letting his friends die wouldn't save the future imo. I don't think Luke would have walked away from that psychologically, the guilt of leaving his friends to die would probably have lead him straight to the dark side. Yoda's wisdom sometimes leaves a lot to be desired.

Well, of course Yoda doesn't have the attachment to Han and Leia as Luke does, and looking at the big picture he'd rather sacrifice them than to risk Luke joining the dark side. I can't really find fault with this, he reasons along the lines "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one or the few".

Of course he tries to talk Luke out of it, but also realizes that Luke must do the thing he feels to be right which at this moment is "the needs of my friends outweigh the needs of the many". The Greek philosopher Aristotle provided a very good rationalization why this approach is also justifiable and - I agree - you suggested that ultimately Luke has to make a decision that will not haunt him for the rest of his life.

But what is it that makes us believe someone claiming to be a Jedi Knight?

As for myself the moment Luke tells the Emperor straight into his face "Soon I'll be dead and you with me" I had no further doubts, Luke was willing to sacrifice himself both for his friends and the greater good, accepting and understanding that for a Jedi "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one or the few".

 

The fault is that he is unable to see that leaving his friends to die would break Luke's spirit. Sacrificing friends when you don't even know it's going to accomplish anything seems very shortsighted.

Yoda's strong belief that sacrificing the friends (who are btw. important assets of the Rebellion) is going to help the greater goal is nonsense. There is no way Yoda can know whether it would actually be worth it or not as he only has a vague idea of the future. As we know from Anakin's fall, trusting your force-foresight blindly is a recipe for disaster. Yoda can't even know if Luke is really the savior of the universe, he admits there is another hope.

In that moment, Luke became greater than all the Jedi before him imo.