CT Why didnt Obi Wan(BEN KENOBI) Keep Luke

Discussion in 'Classic Trilogy' started by Alessandro Sanfilippo, Sep 21, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Iron_lord Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 6
    Neither of the children are any of their's. I just do not understand why you are saying Luke's rightful place is with his family, yet you don't have the same feelings about Leia. You do realize they have the same parents, right..? ;-)[/quote]
    In the novel (and possibly the movie as well) Obi-Wan and Yoda are clear that the children must be split up. Then Bail suggests he adopt Leia at least- and they agree.
  2. darth-sinister Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2001
    star 9

    There's a problem with that train of thought. Vader assaulted his wife and all, which would not yield him the children in the eyes of the court. So legally, they wouldn't go to him. But the reason Luke would go to the Lars is because of their status as family. A family is a family, be it by blood or by marriage. The Lars in this case are the only other family aside from the Naberries because Shmi married into the family eight years earlier. It is that status that grants them the right to raise Luke, instead of Obi-wan, who was just a legal guardian because of the Jedi Order's rules about family and guardianship. Anakin may have seen him like a father, but he was still not his father. Just his legal guardian.

    If they weren't to be split up, then by rights, Leia should have been raised alongside Luke on Tatooine. But since they were split up and Bail choose Leia, that left Luke with the Lars as the only other reasonable option.

    That's only in the EU. Lucas didn't have to adhere to that and thus any and all children descended from a Jedi or a Sith, would have the Force potential.
  3. DRush76 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 25, 2008
    star 4
    Double teaming with Anakin against Dooku in both AOTC and ROTS didn't help Obi-Wan . . . even when Anakin defeated Dooku in the second duel. Why do people keep asking questions that they believe would lead to an easy and neat "happy ending"?

    Why on earth would Obi-Wan keep and raise an infant that was at least a day or two old . . . on a planet like Tatooine, when it would have been easier to hand Luke over to the Lars, who were more capable of raising the kid?


    Was that clearly conveyed in the TPM script? If so, in which scene?
    Last edited by DRush76, Sep 22, 2013
  4. Alessandro Sanfilippo Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2013
    star 1
    SO you saying that Obi Wan sucks as a jedi?
  5. gezvader28 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 22, 2003
    star 4
    .

    where does it say that in the movies ?

    .
  6. timmoishere Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 2, 2007
    star 6
    I imagine Force sensitivity is a lot like being a witch or wizard in the Harry Potter series. It can be passed on from parent to child (like the Malfoy or Weasley families), and it can also come up randomly (like with Hermione). It is also possible for a person to be born into a wizarding family and have no magical talent (like Filch or that one aunt that Ron mentions).
  7. Beezer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 5, 2013
    star 4
    The movie makes absolutely no specific mention of whether or not Force sensitivity is hereditary, but the fact that Anakin's offspring are very strong in the Force implies that there is a hereditary element to Force sensitivity. Otherwise, it would be the galaxy's biggest coincidence ever.

    So all we really can do is ignore the Star Wars universe's biggest plot loophole of all: Realistically speaking, the fact that the people who have this ability pledge themselves to a life of celibacy means that the ability would soon become extinct.
    Last edited by Beezer, Sep 23, 2013
  8. darth-sinister Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2001
    star 9

    That's in the film. Qui-gon wouldn't ask about the boy's father unless it was part of the equation.

    No, just that he wasn't as good against the Sith. Maul and Tyranus both beat him in battle. He only killed Maul because the latter got cocky and forgot about Qui-gon's Lightsaber. Dooku owned him in both duels, even mocking him both times. Anakin lost because he lost control of his emotions and made a rookie mistake. Sidious took out three Jedi Masters without breaking a sweat. Killed two instantly and it was all Kit Fisto could do to defend himself before going down.

    1. Lucas has said that the Jedi aren't celibate. They can have physical relationships, they're just discouraged from having emotional relationships. Meaning that they have sex, but they're not allowed to get married and intentionally start a family.

    2. Force sensitives are born from those who don't have the capacity to use the Force, which is how the Jedi and Sith Orders exist. If Han had married someone not strong with the Force, but their children were Force sensitive, then that is considered normal. Likewise, Anakin and Padme were a positive and negative in this regard, but they had children who were both strong in the Force.
  9. Beezer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 5, 2013
    star 4
    I don't really care what retcon Lucas said in some interview. In the movie, the viewer is given the undeniable impression that the Jedi are celibate, and we are specifically told they are forbidden to love. The movies also undeniable imply that force sensitivity is hereditary, not random.

    The movies never show us any children or parents or lovers of any of the Jedi (besides, obviously, the Skywalkers) and please don't waste my time talking about the EU. Heck, parents and children never even get mentioned. The viewer simply has to ignore logic and reason, which I am perfectly comfortable doing in a fantasy universe, but let's not pretend it makes any sense in the real world.
  10. darth-sinister Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2001
    star 9
    Lucas wasn't retconning anything when he discussed that. He was clarifying the situation based on those who weren't sure. Forbidden to love isn't the same thing as getting your rocks off. You sleep with a random person or a prostitute, you don't automatically call that love? No, of course not. As Anakin states in AOTC, they're not discouraged from loving. They can love. Unconditionally. They're prevented from having emotional attachments to people. Anakin could have gone into a close with Adi Gallia and there'd be no problem. But getting married and knocking up Padme, not a good idea.

    And second, it is hereditary, but given that the Jedi aren't going around having families, that means that the Jedi recruit from families outside of the Jedi Order. In fact, Qui-gon says to Shmi.

    QUI-GON: "Had he been born in the Republic, we would have identified him early, and he would have become a Jedi."

    Meaning that the children are tested and then taken in, based on the results. That's why the Midichlorian test was introduced. Not just to explain why Anakin was so unique, but that it was standard practice among the Jedi. That's why Obi-wan knows that even Yoda pales in comparison to Anakin.
    kubricklynch likes this.
  11. Alessandro Sanfilippo Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2013
    star 1
    So Obi Wan sucks at swordplay?
  12. Beezer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 5, 2013
    star 4
    If he didn't clarify it in the movies, then it wasn't clarified. If the viewer has to watch an interview where Lucas retcons something in order to understand it, then that means it was poorly explained in the movies. You don't get to explain plot holes retroactively after the fact in interviews to compensate for something which is not explained in the movies. Read my sig for further details.
    This is very, very weak. Nowhere at any point in any of the 6 movies is such a thing even remotely implied. Not a single word is ever uttered regarding any of the Jedi's parents or any of them having any children (again, obviously, except for the Skywalkers).

    My friend, admitting that the movies do not make sense from a real world standpoint in this regard really isn't a big deal at all. It's certainly easier than concocting a ridiculous scenario out of thin air that the Jedi are going around getting laid left and right while not forming any personal emotional attachments.
    Last edited by Beezer, Sep 23, 2013
  13. Alessandro Sanfilippo Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2013
    star 1
    But why cant we accept that?
    People now days do it.
    We get laid with random people we meet at clubs and never talk to them again, and we dont love them.
    Well at least I do ;)
  14. Beezer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 5, 2013
    star 4
    Because absolutely nothing whatsoever in the movies even remotely implies that anything like that is going on. Like I said before, not a single Jedi any at time in any of the movies has a single mention of parental units or mates or offspring. Where are QuiGon's kids? Where are Obi-Wan's kids? Where are Mace Windu's kids? (and don't even get me started on the non-human Jedi)

    So it's just pulling something out of completely thin air. You may as well say that Jedi are born from holes in the ground like the Uruk'Hai. If something has absolutely zero basis whatsoever in the movie, it cannot be used as a definitive reason for why such-and-such exists.
  15. Garrett Atkins Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 11, 2013
    star 4
    I know you don't really care about the EU's explanation of how Luke knows of Obi-Wan in ANH, but it is explained like this: Luke and his friend Windy were riding dewbacks in the isolated desert, when a Krayt Dragon attacked them. Obi-Wan scared the dragon off and Luke was told of his name: "Ben Kenobi."
  16. darth-sinister Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2001
    star 9
    I've seen your sig and reject it.


    I'm not concocting anything. If Midichlorians exist in all living beings and there is enough of a concentration of Midichlorians, then that means that someone can use the Force. Which is where the Jedi and Sith come from. Ergo, this is how the Jedi and Sith came into being in the first place, and how they've been able to be resurrected. Palpatine isn't the son of Plagueis. He was a child taken and raised by him. Just as Maul, who is clearly not human, was taken and raised by Sidious. Likewise, Luke will not only have to pass on what he learned to Leia, but to others across the galaxy to create a new Jedi Order. The fact that there are alien Jedi and Sith tells you that they all didn't have sex with each other. They exist because of the Midichlorians. Having children is just one quick way of creating the next generation.

    And don't give me that clap trap about the films remotely implying that. Common sense tells you that is the case. Otherwise there wouldn't be alien Jedi and Sith Lords. The Jedi in the Jedi Order may or may not have had children. That is up for interpretation. Its not like that isn't possible. But what is not only probable, but is fact is that somewhere in the galaxy, a couple gave birth to a child who was taken to the Temple and raised as a Jedi. The same way the Sith kidnapped their own potentials and raised them.

    Sex in general, well, we know for a fact that people can do as they please without developing an attachment. Unless they're emotionally needy or some such.

    You do know there's such a thing as birth control. What makes you think it wouldn't exist in the GFFA.
    Last edited by darth-sinister, Sep 23, 2013
  17. Beezer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 5, 2013
    star 4
    Then perhaps you should discuss these matters in any of the countless EU threads and forums available. Last I checked, I was in the "Classic Trilogy" sub-forum. Not the "Classic Trilogy and other things retcon explained in the EU" sub-forum.
    Really? What lines from the movie (G-level canon) told you any of that?
    So "common sense" tells us that the Jedi are all going out and having intercourse with random strangers that they have no emotional connection to whatsoever even though absolutely nothing in any of the movies remotely implies that any such thing is taking place or that any of them at all have any offspring?

    Really, brah? Really..?!?
    Last edited by Beezer, Sep 23, 2013
  18. darth-sinister Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2001
    star 9
    This has nothing to do with the EU.

    You don't need any canon debate. You just look at the story. Maul was Dathmoir Zabrak. That means he's not Palpatine's son. Ergo, the Sith before him, aren't related.


    Qui-gon wouldn't ask who Anakin's father was, if it wasn't a question about a Jedi being involved. He would have asked where he was. That's your common sense. On top of which is the fact that before leaving for Utapau, Obi-wan comes to Padme's apartment to get her to talk to him. He doesn't turn them in, he knows their relationship is beyond platonic. It isn't until he says that Anakin is the father, does he outright address the 800 pound gorilla in the room.
  19. Beezer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 5, 2013
    star 4
    If it ain't in the movies, it's EU. Even Lucas frequently contradicts himself when giving interviews. AFAIC, this is a discussion about the movies, nothing more, nothing less.
    Oh, I can tell they're not related because they're different races, but there's nothing in the movie that says how they met or how long they've been together. We can safely assume it has been some period of time since we know Sidious trained Maul, but there's nothing that tells us Sidious took him as a child and raised him or how Sidious originally came in contact with Plagueis. In fact, the movies don't even state what race Plagueis is.
    Everything you just said makes perfect sense - and it has absolutely nothing to do with the pet theory pulled from thin air about Jedi going around have random, anonymous sexual encounters with people they have no emotional attachment to.
  20. Beezer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 5, 2013
    star 4
    I used to care about the EU before hearing Lucas himself admit that he didn't care much about it, not to mention that when he wrote the prequels, he pretty much completely threw the entire EU out the window - just like Abrams will be doing for E7.

    Everything you thought you knew about Jaster Mareel, uh I mean Boba Fett, was totally thrown out the window (queue someone trying to explain the ridiculous retcon explanation about Jaster Mareel's real origins). So I sure wouldn't rely too heavy on what you think you know about Grand Admiral Thrawn and Joruus C'Baoth and Mara Jade and ysalamir and Ben Skywalker and Jacen Solo and the Yuuzhan V'ong. It is nothing more than meaningless fluff, easily disposed of when it comes time to create some real canon.
    Last edited by Beezer, Sep 23, 2013
  21. Garrett Atkins Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 11, 2013
    star 4
    Certainly, just pointed that out because I couldn't resist. ;) Honestly, I pick and choose with the EU, even if GL doesn't care.
  22. Beezer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 5, 2013
    star 4
    I follow it with a sort of amused tolerance. I know most of the major storylines, have read a lot of the books (most of which were pretty bad), but I admit I didn't know that part about Luke riding a dewback being attacked by a krayt dragon.

    It's just that when I come to discuss the movies, I come to discuss the movies, not whatever crap found its way into publication to line Lucas' pockets.

    Also, I think a lot of people should realize that sometimes not knowing something makes it far more interesting. Heaven forbid we use our own imaginations instead of having everything painstakingly spelled out to us.
    Last edited by Beezer, Sep 23, 2013
  23. Garrett Atkins Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 11, 2013
    star 4
    Yeah, I get what your saying. Some people think that it doesn't need to be explained in the movie, as long as it explained in the books. And then they try to explain it to us on the movie forums.
    Last edited by Garrett Atkins, Sep 23, 2013
    Beezer likes this.
  24. DRush76 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 25, 2008
    star 4

    What makes you think I said that? I don't recall writing those words. And since when did Obi-Wan have to be undefeated with a light saber, in order to be a decent or great Jedi?
    Last edited by DRush76, Sep 23, 2013
  25. timmoishere Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 2, 2007
    star 6
    "If it ain't in the movies, it's EU." Wrong. Please look at the official canon levels on Wookieepedia. It's all there in black and white.



    Star Wars encompasses the movies, the books, quotes from GL, the TV show, and the comics. It is all a part of the same ongoing saga. It is futile to ignore parts of it just because you disagree with them.
    Last edited by timmoishere, Sep 24, 2013
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.