Was Yoda wrong about the force?

Over in the Episode 3 non spoiler forum, there is an interesting thread about whether or not Anakin will go through "The Trials" before his turn to the dark side. Anyway, Dark Lady Mara brought up a really interesting point when she said "Couldn't it be argued that Obi-Wan also used the dark side (at least part of the time) to defeat Maul?"

That got me to thinking- can the light side alone ever truly defeat the dark side? Every duel we have seen so far suggests that it can't-

Qui Gonn vs. Darth Maul (episode 1)- Qui Gonn is killed.

Obi Wan vs. Darth Maul (episode 1)- - Obi Wan wins, but there is a strong suggestion that his rage over his master's death helped him win. If for no other reason than because he was aggressive in his attack on Maul at the very end. Yoda basically says the force should not be used in this fasion?

Obi Wan vs. Dooku (episode 2)- - Dooku wins.

Anakin vs. Dooku- - well both used the dark side, but Dooku won.

Yoda vs. Dooku- - strictly a draw. You could even argue that Yoda lost because he didn't defeat Dooku.

Obi Wan vs. Darth Vader (episode 4)- - Well we dont really know, do we? Obi Wan sacrificed himself. We don't really know what his intentions were- yes, he was on the defensive, but perhaps he was only doing that so the duel would attract the attention of stormtroopers, allowing the kids to get to the Millenium Falcon.

Luke vs. Darth Vader (episode 5)- - Darth Vader wins.

Luke vs. Darth Vader (episode 6)- Luke pretty much has control of this battle from the beginning, but it is only after he is enraged by the suggestion that his sister will be turned that he actually defeats Vader. And it is his anger over Palpatine's suggestion that his friends would die that starts the duel in the first place.


Who knows what will happen in Episode 3, but from what we have seen so far, I wonder if Yoda is actually wrong about the force? It would seem that you need BOTH the light and the dark side at times, to defeat an adversary. Did he just simplify his teachings for luke, so he wouldnt be confused? I mean, if he had said "You can use the dark side, but only in special circumstances", that would have been extremely confusing for poor Luke. Maybe the Jedi really can and are actually allowed to use the dark side, but they have to be fully trained in the fundamentals first? Okay I will shut up now.

PS- if someone locks this topic and tells me that there is an official "light side/dark side" thread out there, you are going to make me cry.

 

Point A: The use of aggressive force is not the use of the Dark Side. The reason the Jedi teach against it is because giving in to your rage can LEAD to the Dark Side. It makes you more desperate to win and thus wish for more power, no matter the consequences.

Point B: A Jedi can use the DS, but it's taught against because, while it may not force you to the side of Evil, it WILL make you more susceptable to commiting to the DS permenatly.

 

Yoda had no lasting effect on the force. The only way he could effect the balance if he were the chosen one, and he's not.

 

Yoda had no lasting effect on the force. The only way he could effect the balance if he were the chosen one, and he's not.

I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say, sorry

Anyway, I wasnt saying that Yoda has a lasting effect, I was just saying, was yoda wrong in his teachings? He pretty much taught every Jedi on some level. And what he taught Luke was that The force should only be used for defense, never for attack. What I was saying was that this advice doesnt seem to work, because every time we have seen it employed so far, a jedi has been on the losing end of a duel.

My argument was that you actually DO need the dark side, in order to conquer an opponent.

Which leads to the question, was Yoda just wrong, or was he just simplifying the whole thing so as not to confuse Luke?

Or am i completely wrong, and do you NEVER need to go to the dark side at all?

 

Hey, reading this post I got to thinking, why did Obi-Wan sacrafice himself again? To distract Vader, right? But wouldn't a long, balls-out fight have been even more distracting? As it is, Obi Wan vanishes and Vader stomps on his cloak for a second before turning his attention to Luke, et al. Luke is protected far more by the conviently closing blast door than Obi-Wan's sacrafice.

In answer to the topic question, the dark side will always win in a fight, because the dark side is where agression etc lies. In battle, a pure Jedi should only use the Force for defense-- and by defense, I mean things like parrying and harmlessly deflecting blows. The pure Jedi can never hope to win a fight, only to stalemate forever. The giving in to the impulse to harm, which is required to win a fight, is giving in to the dark side.

Thus, all Jedi flirt with the dark side of the Force, just as we all must balance the gentle, loving aspects of our selves against the savage.

 

The pure Jedi can never hope to win a fight, only to stalemate forever
I have to disagree with you on this. First of all, what exactly defines a "pure jedi" from the rest of the jedi order. And second...a Jedi uses force as a method of protecting themselves and others. It is not the dark side to stand up against evil with the intention of winning the fight...when you are aware of your own moral limitations. A Jedi acts as a servant of all life...while a Sith uses their power for personal gain alone.

It would seem that you need BOTH the light and the dark side at times
Agreed, Yoda was correct when he said:
"A jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense." The major difference being that a Jedi seeks the enlightenment and balance with this power...while a Sith has no reservations about using their power for personal gain.

 

You can kill someone if your being defensive. Ever hear of killing someone in self defense.

 

Of course I've heard of self defense. But I don't think it is harmonious with "the light side" of the Force.

Granted, this is alot of conjecture on my part, but the light side seems characterstic of patience, peace, selflessness, and love, while the dark side thrives on selfishness, anger, greed, desire, power etc.

A Jedi which totally adhered to the light side-- an entirely hypotehtical situation, mind you-- would, I think, be bound to respect even the life of his attacker and would do no harm, since doing harm is not an act of love.

If someone is attacking a real person, the attackee is bond to get angry, etc, and strike back. "Self Defense" is excusable because it's natural to preserve yourself and to fight an attacker, but that doesn't make it noble.

Luckily for the beleviability of our dear saga, the Jedi are treated as real people who are in an eternal (and internal) struggle between the selfish and selfless emotions, between the light and dark sides of The Force. You know, Star Wars is often characterized in broad strokes as the black-and-white battle between good and evil, but, save for ANH, I think the Jedi have always been portrayed in varying shades of grey.

 

>>>Obi Wan vs. Darth Maul (episode 1)- - Obi Wan wins, but there is a strong suggestion that his rage over his master's death helped him win. If for no other reason than because he was aggressive in his attack on Maul at the very end. Yoda basically says the force should not be used in this fasion?

That's a funny way of looking at it, IMHO.

Watch again;

Obi Wan comes out of the gates and attacks Maul in the coolest few seconds of film ever made- the look of anger on his face is apparent, as he drives Maul back.
We get a close up of his angry looking face (ie. Lucas saying to the audience- "HE'S ANGRY NOW")- and then he gets pushed into a pit. Because he was giving in to anger, he almost falls.
Maul is a master of the Dark Side- Obi Wan starts playing his game, and loses.
Then Obi Wan closes his eyes, calms himself, jumps up and defeats Maul. He goes beyond the Dark Side, and this is how he defeats him.

A master of the Dark Side works by exploiting the Dark Side in others. Watch Palpatine in action- everything he does involves manipulating the fear and anger of others to push them into doing what he wants them to do. Same thing with Vader in the OT- he instils fear into the various generals in order to get them to "perform" for him.

The Dark Side is more powerful, because it is unrestricted use of the Force. But, as Yoda correctly warns, "consume you it will." It will destroy you.

 

Star Wars is often characterized in broad strokes as the black-and-white battle between good and evil
I think the characters in Star Wars are meant to exhibit the clear differences between good and evil. GL has said that he wanted to pass along the lessons of our classic mythology...in a new setting (space). ANd to do so, there can be no question of who the good guys and bad guys are.

 

By the time of the OT, there is no question of who the good guys and bad guys are. It's about the fight between good and evil- both on the large scale and the small.

The PT sets this up, by showing where evil comes from. Both on the large scale (ie. the Empire) and the small (ie. Darth Vader.)

 

" Hey, reading this post I got to thinking, why did Obi-Wan sacrafice himself again? To distract Vader, right? But wouldn't a long, balls-out fight have been even more distracting? As it is, Obi Wan vanishes and Vader stomps on his cloak for a second before turning his attention to Luke, et al. Luke is protected far more by the conviently closing blast door than Obi-Wan's sacrafice. "

Out-of-universe answer, Lucas though Ben's character served no purpose in the rest of the film. After ANH's success, he needed a new Jedi Master to train Luke, thus Yoda was born (900 years hence. )

In-universe, I think Ben did it as a demonstration to Luke. He and Yoda are trying to get Luke to face Vader. What better way to do so by having Luke see his new friend and mentor struck down by the "Master of Evil". This makes a great deal of sense when you consider that Ben knew he would be able to come back and aide Luke.

Besides, since Anakin is the Chosen One, Ben couldn't kill him. Not saying that Anakin is bulletproof, but it wasn't his time to die. Had he done so, Palps would have found a new apprentice to replace Vader, and thus the father-son relationship that was crucial to Luke getting close to Vader and, subsequently, Palps, would be gone. The new apprenctice would have no relationship whatsoever to Luke, and thus would kill him in a heartbeat. Vader was easily capable of killing Luke, yet chose not to over and over again. Luke simply returned the favor in ROTJ.

Could Luke have defeated any other "Darth"?

 

I don't think the Dark Side is stronger so much as the Sith just fight dirty. There's a certain code of conduct you can expect from a Jedi during a duel, but Sith have no such restraint. Can you honestly pictures Obi-Wan clocking someone with his saber hilt and then running them through? Kind of a sucker punch cheap shot. As scott said, Obi-Wan defeated Maul by reaching out to the Force calmly and defeated him. Maul killed Qui-Gon with a cheap shot. Dooku, however, flat out-fought Obi-Wan and Anakin. I don't think this is a statement on the strength of the Dark Side as much as it is a statement on Dooku's swordsmanshp. However, he only escaped Yoda by putting his fellows in danger. A Jedi would never threaten an incapacitated opponent to gain an advantage. In ESB, Luke was doing pretty well against Vader, at least to my eyes. He only really seemed to start to lose it when Vader started pitching stuff at him and dumped him out a window. No Jedi does that. Luke was severely outmatched, of course, but he was at least holding his own. Finally, in ROTJ, Luke only fought Vader when Palps ticked him off. When Luke was on the defensive, he controlled the fight pretty well. But since Luke never intended to defeat Vader, I don't think we can really tell on this one. He had no interest in killing Vader unless Palps goaded him into trying.

 

And the dark side lends itself to a more aggressive stlye.

 

Krash: I think the characters in Star Wars are meant to exhibit the clear differences between good and evil. GL has said that he wanted to pass along the lessons of our classic mythology...in a new setting (space). ANd to do so, there can be no question of who the good guys and bad guys are.

Are the good guys and bad guys clearly defined?

Han Solo is a smuggler and general miscreant.

The entire story of ESB and ROTJ concern Luke's dance with the dark side. He even gives into the dark side before abandoning it.

The protagonist for the entire saga is Anakin/Vader. In light of the OT, what emotions are the audience supposed to feel toward Vader in the OT? He can't just say he's a bad guy, since the details of his fall have been (so far at least) presented sympathetically.

From what we have of the PT, The Republic isn't taken over by the Empire, it just becomes the Empire. So, is the loyalist position moral or immoral?

Plus, everyone's favourite shade of grey, Boba Fett, is made entirely sympathetic in the scene with his father's empty helmet.

There's quite a bit of grey in these characters and story, and I think that's precisely what makes Star Wars more than just a simplistic tale.


MayBeJedi:"In-universe, I think Ben did it as a demonstration to Luke. He and Yoda are trying to get Luke to face Vader. What better way to do so by having Luke see his new friend and mentor struck down by the "Master of Evil". This makes a great deal of sense when you consider that Ben knew he would be able to come back and aide Luke."

Interesting theory. This could also explain why he told Luke that Vader killed his father-- he's trying to goad him into a fight!

 

"Thus, all Jedi flirt with the dark side of the Force, just as we all must balance the gentle, loving aspects of our selves against the savage."

Even the most pure characters must have some aspect of evil in them, even the most evil must have some aspect of good.

 

" Even the most pure characters must have some aspect of evil in them, even the most evil must have some aspect of good."

Agreed. Otherwise, Anakin could not have been redeemed. Keep in mind, also, that the novelizations and making's-of state that looking far into the future requires use of the Dark Side.

Deep in his meditations, peering through the Dark Side, Master Yoda felt a sudden surge of anger, of outrage beyond control. The diminutive Master's eyes popped open wide at the overwhelming strength of that rage.

And the he heard a voice, a familiar voice, crying, "No, Anakin! No! Don't! No!" - AOTC novelization

There's also this from the ROTJ novelization...

Luke's indignation melted, leaving only sadness in its wake. "I found out Darth Vader was my father," he whispered.

"To be a Jedi, Luke, you must confront and then go beyond the dark side-the side your father couldn't get past. Impatience is the easiest door-for you, like your father. Only, your father was seduced by what he found on the other side of the door, and you have held firm. You're no longer so reckless now, Luke. You are strong and patient. And you are ready for your final confrontation."

Luke shook his head again, as the implications of the old Jedi's speech became clear. "I can't do it, Ben."
Obi-wan Kenobi's shoulders slumped in defeat. "Then the Emperor has already won. You were our only hope."

Interesting, no?
Remember, Yoda did know how to catch, manipulate and throw Force lightning. CT- Yoda's knowledge of the darkside

 

We didnt see enough of Darth Maul to really know, but wasn't he basically called the embodiment of evil by George Lucas? There is an interesting thread out there somewhere where someone linked to a Bill Moyers interview with him, and it discusses things like this in detail. So i dont know if there is supposed to be any good in him at all. Especially when you consider that he was probably born into the sith "religion".

 

MOYERS: The mesmerizing figure in The Phantom Menace to me is Darth Maul. When I saw him, I thought of Lucifer in Paradise Lost or the devil in Dante's Inferno. He's the Evil Other--but with powerful human traits.

LUCAS: Yes, I was trying to find somebody who could compete with Darth Vader, who is now one of the most famous evil characters. So we went back into representations of evil. Not only the Christian, but also Hindu and other religious icons, as well as the monsters in Greek mythology.

MOYERS: What did you find in all these representations?

LUCAS: A lot of evil characters have horns. [Laughs.]

MOYERS: And does your use of red suggest the flames of hell?

LUCAS: Yes. It's a motif that I've been using with the Emperor and the Emperor's minions. I mean, red is an aggressive color. Evil is aggressive.

MOYERS: Is Darth Maul just a composite of what you found in your research, or are we seeing something from your own imagination and experience?

LUCAS: If you're trying to build an icon of evil, you have to go down into the subconscious of the human race over a period of time and pull out the images that equate to the emotion you are trying to project.

MOYERS: What emotion do you feel when you look at Darth Maul?

LUCAS: Fear. You wouldn't want to meet him in a dark alley. But he's not repulsive. He's something you should be afraid of, without [his] being a monster whose intestines have been ripped out and thrown all over the screen.

MOYERS: Is the emotion you wanted from him different from the emotion you wanted from Darth Vader?

LUCAS: It's essentially the same, just in a different kind of way. Darth Vader was half machine, half man, and that's where he lost a lot of his humanity. He has mechanical legs. He has mechanical arms. He's hooked up to a breathing machine. This one is all human. I wanted him to be an alien, but I wanted him to be human enough that we could identify with him.

MOYERS: He's us?

LUCAS: Yes, he's the evil within us.

Here's the entire interview.

 

I think Yoda was right but, though a Jedi never uses the Force for attack he never said anything about your saber. If you fight to incapacitate your opponent instead of killing them I don't think it's of the Dark Side.(Dooku was going to kill Anakin and Obi he just knocked them down first)

-Jedi Master Zax Starwalker

 

Suineme, I posted a topic just like this a few years ago, but nobody agreed with me. Nice to find someone else who shares the opinion.

When I made the point I referred to Vader's line in ESB. "Only your hatred can destroy me".

I believe that's ABSOLUTILY true, that Sith can only be killed when their foe gets mad. Think about it, Obi gets mad when his master dies, it's very obvious.
Luke gets mad at Vader in ROTJ and kicks ass, to which the Emperor replies,"Your hate has made you powerful." reminded me of "Only your hatred can destroy me."

And we see in ESB and AOTC that when the Jedi control their feelings, they cannot defeat a Sith..

 

Seeing this post pop up, I thought "wow, great topic." I didn't realize i'd commented in it before.

I agree with the parent post. The Jedi cannot defeat the Sith because the light side cannot over-power the dark side. This is what makes Luke's decision in Jedi particularly hefty, he casts down his weapon and with it the Dark Side, to embrace certain death (like Obi-Wan) as a true Jedi.

 

I do think yoda and ben for that matter were simplifying things so luke could do the job they wanted him to do. At the same time it is possible to destroy people out of love and not hate. Its all a matter of perspective.
My apprentis got mixed up in a bad croud and they got her into all kinds of trouble. when me and her parents were getting her away from all of it and bringing her back to herself these people wouldn't let go. So I got them arrested, expeled, treatened, "physicly protected her interests", exc... but not out of hatered or anger at them, but out of love for her. Its hard to explain.
So the DS isn't nesacary to beat people just power and perspective.

 

To fight while angry is not using the dark side of the Force. It is when you channel that anger and allow it to take over. I really don't think that Obi-Wan was using his anger in the fight. He was just angry while fighting. That's not the dark side.

 

In a word: NO.

After milling over the force for about a thousand years, I'd say he's the most accurate.