PT Why hide Luke?

Who said it was? Have never heard that.

 

It's about both. What is legal, is my own personal opinion too. Remember, the Galactic Republic/Empire were the elected Government of the entire Galaxy. They were elected by the living beings of the Galaxy to enforce all the laws of all the countries of all the planets of the entire Galaxy. Whereas the Nazis ruled one country (sometimes more), committed crimes (just like the Jedi) that were considered illegal to the rest of the world.

The Jedi had forfeited their right to live when they committed acts of treason against the elected Galactic Republic, as well as (Nazi style) genocide against the Sith, because the Sith have a different religious view than the Jedi.
Palpatine did present the matter before the Senate. He proposes the rest of the Jedi be hunted down and defeated for their act of treason. The senate (the voice and representatives of all planets in the galaxy) applaud and agree with Palps' proposal.
As for the Younglings... They were been trained by an outlawed (terrorist) organisation. The death of the Younglings is on Jedi.
Lastly and most important.... If the Jedi (including the Younglings) had done no wrong and it was the Sith who were the true evil. Wouldn't the will of the force chosen the Jedi to defeat the Sith? Seriously, if 2 Sith Lords can defeat thousands of Jedi, then it clearly was meant to be.

 

I'm going to be honest with you. I find your line of posting and the way you are saying things to me not only highly offensive (inferring I'm a racist, or OK with colonialism earlier in a post) and your "confused" posting is coming across a lot like concern trolling to me. I'm not an idiot, and I've gone round and round delineating why I think the way I do. If you can't see why someone else might think differently, maybe it's not me that needs to expand my horizons.

I'm really not going to engage in any conversation with you on this topic if you cannot bring the sanctimoniousness down from where it's quite obviously ratcheted up. I get that you don't like the PT, and are looking for ways to argue against it. I get that you don't have the same opinion as me. Stop making this a personal crusade.

 

Samuel Vimes wrote

And not just from Sand People, as Luke says "Sand People, or WORSE."

I wanted to add this, too. Assuming that the Tuskens actually torture people slowly to death for pleasure and over extended periods, then I'd probably be rather killed quickly by a Krayt dragon.

Rewatched The Searchers last night with a friend and in case there's any doubt that it was the inspiration both for ANH and AotC just take a look at the picture composition of John Wayne watching the Commanche camp before the morning attack by the Texas Rangers.

Based on the true story of Cynthia Ann Parker (and reading up on the Commanches on non-US Wikipedia articles) I reluctantly have to report that the Commanches had a bad reputation for being extremely savage and brutal, which is less owed to propaganda but corresponding reports from other Native Americans, Mexicans and US settlers.

But still (and assuming they were the template for the Tuskens) I'm not aware of reports that they had fun slowly torturing their victims to death.

P.S. Here is an interesting article on racism in The Searchers: http://www.brentonpriestley.com/writing/searchers.htm

General consensus seems to be that John Ford wanted to convey a realistic image of the settlers' racism, back then. What we learn from Cliegg Lars about the Tuskens would then rather appear to be an analogy of this kind of racism.

In his DVD audio commentary George Lucas doesn't provide any clues regarding Shmi's captivity conditions. The hut where she is being hold features either a stove to keep her warm or to heat up the metal instruments used to torture her. It remains ambivalent and, IMHO, ultimately depends on the viewer's interpretation (that ultimately may tell the viewer more about him- or herself ...).

 

The Sith were criminals for their past and current crimes. That's why the Jedi and the Republic considered the Sith to be public enemy number one. The Sith tricked the people into electing one of their own into office and broke many intergalactic laws in order to gain more power.

The Sith also forfeited their right to live when they enslaved the galaxy for few hundred years. It wasn't because of religious views, it was because of the crimes the Sith committed.

He lied and twisted the truth. He didn't tell the Senate that he was Darth Sidious and was the one who was behind the Separatist movement and thus the Clone Wars, because he was out to settle a vendetta that his predecessors started.

The Jedi were not outlawed until the Sith lied about what happened and then a Sith Lord killed them, which is all on the heads of the two Sith Lords.

The Force was not a deciding factor on who won and who lost. The Chosen One exists for the purpose of bringing balance back to the Force and that means eliminating the Sith. As Lor San Tekka states, "Without the Jedi, there can be no balance in the Force." The Sith are extinct now, whereas the Jedi are not.

 

Isn't this thread about hiding Luke? Anyway, I'll just add I don't care (to use a decent expression) about the Tusken raiders. I would've done the same in Anakin's place. You kidnap and torture my mother, you pay for that. Without any thinking. But that's just me.

 

Real.

 

How long have the tuskens lived on tatooine? How long have the settlers been there? Maybe the tuskens are just defending their land. Don't they live in nasty places like the dune sea and Jundland wastelands? Sounds to me like the settlers killed all the tuskens in the good land.

 

While it's not made explicitly clear it's implied that the Tuskens are the native people of Tatooine. It's quite obvious. They're not exactly a space faring people that are likely to've traveled from other worlds. There's a clear & deliberate allegory to our colonial past, ie technologically more advanced outsiders settling close to less advanced indigenous peoples, resulting in conflict. Doesn't in any way excuse some of the actions of the Tuskens of course.
If the allegory isn't obvious enough Lucas spells it out with it with this shot, exactly like the one from The Searches as posted by Lt. Hija

It's nothing personal, it's just a conversation. I'm not making up your words & your views. They are your own. Some of them are IMO quite extreme, therefore you shouldn't be surprised that they provoke a strong reaction. You're right I (& others) allow no room or understanding to downplay Anakin's slaughter of the Tusken women & children on the basis that the Sand People aren't people. The ugly extension of that is that their children aren't really children. Now, I'm conscious that we're talking about a fantasy movie here, but we still try to look at these things from an in-universe POV. On that basis this view is...objectionable, to say the least. The facts we know about the Tuskens are that they're a humanoid race. That is they have humanoid physiology (like humans, Rodians, Twi-Leks etc). Also that they're intelligent. They have language, they co-operate, they live in communities, they build homes, they tame animals & they use sophisticated technology like rifles. They're even smart enough to ride single file to hide their numbers. In other words they're people. No one, & I mean no one I've ever heard of has classified beings like that literally as animals. If I've been harsh in my objections it's only due to some of your remarks. You compare them to hyenas & chimps but then say "I actually see them as sentient animals, since I literally don't even know what they look like." Comments like will always provoke a response bcs (a) sentience contradicts your label of the Tuskens as hyena or chimp-like, (b) "Sentient animals" is an accurate description of people like us, (c) if the Tuskens are sentient then the children Anakin killed were sentient, & (d) your comment implied that what a race such as the Sand People look like under their masks is a relevant factor. Yes, this is all treacherous territory for a discussion so maybe we shouldn't have gone down this path. I take some blame for that but it wasn't just me talking to myself.

Arguing against the PT? In what way?? I'm arguing for the PT. I'm understanding & acknowledging the very point Lucas was making in the movie. That Anakin going beyond retribution against the Tusken warriors & systematically killing the women & children was a violent & evil act. That was the whole point of the scene. It's a major early step on his own path towards evil. His own guilt regarding this act was clear. The film even cuts away to a disturbed reaction from Yoda...& even from Qui-Gon all the way from the afterlife! It's a big deal. It's brought up again in the next film. The only one who brushes it off is Padme, but she has an excuse. As far as we know she doesn't even know what a "Tusken" is. Has never seen one. In their anger she hears Cleigg & Anakin describe them as animals & beasts. For all she knows they are just apes or the like who hunt prey. We as viewers don't have that excuse. We've seen them & know they're sentient people. Quite nasty ones who deserve to be fought at times but that doesn't in any way make their defenseless children fair game.

I'm happy to move on from this topic if you are. What I will say is I don't think for a second your comments represent your views in any real world scenario, so pls don't take it as such. Our disagreement is 100% confined to this in-universe topic. & it's only a movie, so let's keep it in that perspective

 

Darth Downunder Sepra

Please stop the heated back-and-forth. If you want to discuss personal ethics, please do so civilly in the PM system


In general, let's stay on the topic, guys. This is the second mod warning in a few posts, so the thread is on thin ice

 

Dawg, Where the hell have you been?

I'm surprised that this wasn't shut down yet.

 

It will be very quickly, if it doesn't get right back on topic

So next post, please be about the topic, people

 

Lucas himself answers this thread question in this interview:

"So everybody has to go into hiding. The Skywalker line is very strong with the Force, so Ben says “I think we should protect the kids, because they may be able to help us right the wrong that your husband has created in the universe.” And so Ben takes one and gives him to a couple out there on Tatooine and he gets his little hideout in the hills and he watches him grow. Ben can’t raise Luke himself, because he’s a wanted man."

THE END

 

It's logical for sure. Ben wanted Luke to be protected and not ever found

 

And the last laugh goes to DD. The one and only..

 

"Horrified reactions," Okaaay... How do you account for Obi-Wan covering his mouth trying not to laugh when telling Padme about the death of the Younglings? He found it quite amusing, not horrific.

There is no actual proof as to who killed the Lars. We never actually see who killed the Younglings.

 

One must distinguish an actor's difficulties in saying a line from the character's emotions.

 

Ewan's not trying to laugh. He's trying to imitate Guinness's mannerisms from when he did ANH.



If Lucas thought he was laughing, he would have re-shot the scene. He's not that bad of a director.

 

It certainly looks like he's trying not to laugh. I'm one of many who see this.

Also, Lucas allowed the deliveries of many strange lines slip through. E.g. Sand getting everywhere, wish away my feelings etc.

Please, don't get me wrong. I love the PT, and I think George Lucas is a brilliant director. I was honoured to have met George once, in a restaurant when he was in Australia filming ROTS.

 

Ewan's smile is just Ewan breaking character because of the corniness of Padme's reaction. It's crazy to think it implies that he slaughtered younglings with the intent of framing the Sith when nothing in the movie indicates this.

 

I don't doubt you are a real fan, but do you really think Obi-Wan and Yoda did that or are you just role-playing?

 

I'm not role-playing.

As for"Obi-Wan and Yoda" involvement, I think it has to be considered as a possibility. We don't actually see how they died. At the same time, I also believe the Younglings deserved their punishment handed down , due to them being part of the Jedi Order. So i'm actually looking at it from both sides.

It's the same with the Owen and Beru murders. No-one has yet find any canon proof as to who did it. Everyone immediately points the finger at the Empire. It possibly was. However, who is the person who Owen calls "a crazy old man"? As well as protecting Luke from for all those years? This is the same person who has the most to benefit from the Lars death so he can finally convince Luke to go to Alderaan, after Luke said NO the first time. It makes no sense that the Empire would kill their only lead in their investigation. You need to ask yourself the questions,,, Who had the motive and the most to benefit from the death of the Lars?

Regarding this thread. I can't believe that everyone thinks it was right thing to do hiding Luke and Leia from their Father. What this means is, everyone must think that it's fine for any group of people (who have no authority to do so) to steal and hide babies, because they think you wouldn't make a good parent. This is what Yoda, Obi-Wan and bail did.

I'm not saying the Sith/republic/Empire Didn't do some bad things. Sure they did some things that were questionable. But, they were elected to rule an entire Galaxy. No one could possibly understand how difficult that must be. Sure there would be some species and planets that would feel hard done by - that's natural. For the majority of the Planets, it worked. It's just that the Jedi and the Rebellion had other plans, which caused all the conflict in the galaxy.

 

PHIERY wrote

No-one has yet find any canon proof as to who did it. Everyone immediately points the finger at the Empire. It possibly was. However, who is the person who Owen calls "a crazy old man"? As well as protecting Luke from for all those years? This is the same person who has the most to benefit from the Lars death so he can finally convince Luke to go to Alderaan, after Luke said NO the first time. It makes no sense that the Empire would kill their only lead in their investigation. You need to ask yourself the questions,,, Who had the motive and the most to benefit from the death of the Lars?

First, Vader's "Don't attract attention" in the extended screenplay of ANH was apparently interpreted by Commander Praji to eliminate everybody that had gotten in touch with the stolen plans (e.g. Jawas). The Jawas told the stormtroopers to whom they had sold the droids and showing up at Lars Homestead, Owen Lars probably and truthfully cooperated and told them they were with his nephew at the south ridge - except that Luke had never gone there...

The sandtroopers got the information they wanted and then killed Beru and Owen and made it look like the Sandpeople had done it.

To even suggest that Kenobi orchestrated their deaths would immediatedly raise the question "How"? He was with Luke all the time and Luke's landspeeder was the fastest transportation around.

 

Well we have the moment the scared youngling asks for Anakin's help, and he just coldly ignites his saber. It's kind of a stretch to think he was about to do anything beside killing them himself. It's very tragic as well, he is killing a large part of himself as Sidious foresaw - "Do not hesitate, show no mercy. Only then will you be strong enough in the dark side to save Padme." The youngling obviously looks up to him as he recognises him as Anakin Skywalker, but Anakin is not the same person he was when he last left the Temple.
Plus Obi-Wan saw the holo-recording, which starts with a padawan falling down dead, and involves Anakin strangling another padawan as Cin Drallig attempts to stop him. The footage Obi-Wan tells Padme about. Granted it was an older padawan than the ones we saw Anakin confront, but still not a mature Jedi.

I get where you are coming from, it was conveniently the event that gave Luke a chance to follow his destiny, but when was this supposed to have happened? Obi-Wan was with Luke a fair distance out into the wastelands when it occurred if I'm not mistaken. The implication that it was the Empire gives Luke further motivation to want to follow his father's path.

Loosely related to this, there is a mirror to Anakin's path in Luke's; the deaths of Qui-Gon and Shmi is a contributor to Anakin's fall and his ultimate turn to the Sith. Whereas; Luke's foster parents deaths and Obi-Wan's death are inversely crucial to Luke becoming a Jedi.

Interesting. Although I doubt Sidious would let the children live if he knew they survived. It would be one more obstacle to having a completely subservient Vader. And why I think Sidious would rather Vader's quest for immortality for Padme was not one Vader would succeed with.
As for Anakin/Vader I think even without The Emperor's involvement the kids would either end up turned or dead. Vader has lost a lot of his humanity by the end of ROTS, and it is hard to see him doing for his kids what he would have done before Padme dies.

I can't agree with this, I can imagine living in an Empire, and having to go with everything the Sith will for every being in the galaxy or be killed. No thanks.