With AOTC/TPM Lucas pulls the rug out from under our expectations

Discussion in 'Attack of the Clones' started by Jabbadabbado, Sep 18, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SWfan2002 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 28, 2002
    star 4
    Perhaps Yoda and Obi-Wan have a bit of a falling out. Yoda might want to just kill Anakin once he has turned to the darkside, but Obi-Wan may want to try and turn him back to the good side.
  2. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    Reading ophelia's buddhist definition of attachment into the Jedi philosophy certainly makes a lot of sense.

    So, Anakin's obsession with Padme = attachment (that's bad). Luke's willingness to sacrifice himself at the alter of his faith in his father = something that we don't have to call attachment because it doesn't fit the definition.

    My quarrel, if I have one, is the apparent attempt to shoehorn Anakin's love for his mother into that buddhist definition of (bad) attachment. The Star Wars saga almost seems to be saying: maternal devotion = bad. Paternal devotion = good.

    Or to take it further, attachment to women is bad. Luke has to free himself from the distractions of his sexual attraction to Leia. Anakin's love for Padme is dangerous. Anakin's love for his mother is a problem for the Jedi and helps cause the Tusken slaughter.
  3. ophelia Cards Against Humanity Host. Ex-Mod

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Jun 25, 2002
    star 6
    Jabbadabbadoo wrote:

    My quarrel, if I have one, is the apparent attempt to shoehorn Anakin's love for his mother into that buddhist definition of (bad) attachment.

    Personally, I think that's where the Jedi made a big mistake. We shall see if the events of Ep. III bear this theory out . . .

    The Star Wars saga almost seems to be saying: maternal devotion = bad. Paternal devotion = good.

    Someone brought this up in the Anakin's Profoundly Human Frailty thread . . . (may have been PadmeLeiaJaina )?

    Anyway, the idea is that in mythic terms, the mother represents dependency, indulgence, and lack of a strong sense of self, while the father represents independence, discipline, and strong selfhood. This at least was Joseph Campbell's perception, and Lucas used a lot of his ideas. (Lucas studied Campbell, who studied Jung, who was a student of Freud, who trained under Count Dooku!!! Okay--no . . . no, forget that last part. Sorry. Stop with "Mother Of All Mother-Blamers" Freud). ;)

    Or to take it further, attachment to women is bad. Luke has to free himself from the distractions of his sexual attraction to Leia. Anakin's love for Padme is dangerous. Anakin's love for his mother is a problem for the Jedi and helps cause the Tusken slaughter.

    Ouch. :( I see what you mean. It's one thing to say that Star Wars is a story about fathers and sons; it's another to say that women are considered actively dangerous to men in the GFFA, or at least to male Jedi. (Although the Jedi were originally an "ancient brotherhood" . . . "no gurls alloud" was implied).

    Somebody convince me otherwise.

    Please?
  4. ShaneP Ex-Mod Officio

    Member Since:
    Mar 26, 2001
    star 6
    Wait, I think you guys are onto something. Remember back during pre-production of TPM when Lucas said something along the lines of the whereas the OT was about the bad/good father, the PT would be about the good mother/bad mother?

    Seems like I remember something Lucas said like that.
    Anyone recall that more specifically?
  5. EnforcerSG Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 12, 2001
    star 4
    Leia would have to be a few years older to have "images and feelings" about her mother.

    No, it is possible that Liea spends a little more time with PAdme than Luke does. Maybe Luke is taken away first, maybe the ppl around Padme were expecting one child, and had a plan for that one, and when two came out, they needed time to think of another plan. As such, Luke was taken away first, and Padme got some time with Liea. Then at the end, Liea must be taken away, and Padme asks "Will she even remember me?" And someone around her says "I am sure she will."

    Or it could be some force trick, or maybe Liea will 'touch' Padme's mind through the force, or something. Point is, Padme CAN die without messing up that part of the story.

    Does anyone now question what the prophecy means by "Bringing balance to the Force"?

    The force is like nature. You can treat it well, use it carefully without messing it up, or you can chop down all the trees, polute the water, ect. The Jedi so the former, the Sith do the later. (best analigy I can come up with. Either that or the calm pond, and the Jedi are a cannoe, and the Sith are a motar boat)

    But Yoda and Ben were wrong about Luke not going to Bespin. Had Luke not gone, he wouldn't have encountered Vader and he wouldn't have learned that he was his father. This is the crucial point of the saga. For it is here that Luke learns the truth, a truth that connects him to Vader because of his love for his father. And it this realization that drives him to redeem Vader instead of killing him.


    But if Luke stayed on Dagobah and became a very strong jedi and eventually fairly defeated Vader never knowing they were related (which was OB1's and Yoda's plan I think), and if he took Palpatine out too, then the Empire would lose. So what if Vader is redeamed as long as the light side wins.
  6. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    So what if Vader is redeamed as long as the light side wins.

    I disagree--I think it is essential to the story that Vader be redeemed. Otherwise, we have a western in space with the "good guys" vs. the "bad guys"--and I wouldn't watch it. I'm attracted to the deeper themes of Star Wars, the spirituality and mythological aspects of the Force, the story of a good man gone bad and brought back to good again. It gives me hope. Luke found the good in his father, and that let me know that there was good in all of us. (And as a side note, I think it is downright disgusting that Obi-Wan was trying to convince Luke to commit patricide--but that's probably a topic for another thread.)
  7. AgentCoop Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 16, 2002
    star 4
    "Remember back during pre-production of TPM when Lucas said something along the lines of the whereas the OT was about the bad/good father, the PT would be about the good mother/bad mother?"

    Then where is this "good mother" in the PT? :confused:
  8. Durwood Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2002
    star 5
    My quarrel, if I have one, is the apparent attempt to shoehorn Anakin's love for his mother into that buddhist definition of (bad) attachment. The Star Wars saga almost seems to be saying: maternal devotion = bad. Paternal devotion = good.

    It's not saying that at all. The basic premise of the whole attachment theory as it applies to Star Wars is that you need to accept the inevitable. It's like the old prayer, "Lord, give me the strength to change the things I can, the peace to accept the things I can't, and the wisdom to know the difference." I think that's basically the Jedi "religion" in a nutshell.
  9. ophelia Cards Against Humanity Host. Ex-Mod

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Jun 25, 2002
    star 6
    ShaneP wrote:

    Wait, I think you guys are onto something. Remember back during pre-production of TPM when Lucas said something along the lines of the whereas the OT was about the bad/good father, the PT would be about the good mother/bad mother?

    Must've missed that . . . I did a quick search on Google just now and only came up with references to the "BMF" on Mace Windu's lightsaber. (That must be what Lucas was referring to!! "That Mace Windu is a real bad mother--!)"

    Seriously though . . . if the PT is about mothers, then I guess we're probably supposed to compare Shmi and Padmé--seeing as they're the only two women with major roles. I suppose Shmi might be the "good mother," since she encourages Anakin to go out into the world, to make something of himself, and take responsibility for his own destiny. Maybe his desire to go back to her is bad because it undercuts his independence and negates her sacrifice--I dunno.

    If Padmé is the "bad mother," and here I'm thinking mother-figure to Anakin, it may be because she kind of glosses over the really serious problems he's having--what with killing off villages and everything. (New GFFA bumper sticker: "It takes a Jedi to raze a village)." In other words, Padmé allows him not to take responsibility--to remain childlike.

    Could be. I'm still a little uncomfortable with this though . . . It would be one thing to say that a teenager or young adult was at fault by refusing to honor his mother's sacrifice by letting go of her. (I think even that would be really hard). But Anakin was nine years old when he left Shmi . . . I hope Lucas' message isn't that we're supposed to look at small, parentless children and say "suck it in, soldier."

    Just to clarify--I think Anakin is unhealthily attached--that is to say, Attached--to Shmi at age 20. The evidence is that her loss causes him to betray everything he says he believes in. Nicht gut. However, I think he got that way in part because his normal attachment to her at age 9 was not dealt with properly.

    I adore Obi-Wan and I think the Jedi are really cool, but where Anakin is concerned, they didn't see what was coming at them until it was too late.
  10. Merkel Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 21, 2002
    star 1
    This thread is fantastic!!!

    One thing I think is important to reatain is that Palpatine probably really didn't need Anakin/Vader in order to create an Empire.
    Anakin was enlisted by Palpatine to make Palpatine's goal easier to achieve. Anakin was just the next Sidious' aprentice, the next sith. If it wasn't Anankin, it would've been another guy (maybe not as poweful though).
    Enlisting Anakin was probably one of Palpatine's greatest advantages in the beginning (as he had at his service of the strongest force users in the galaxy, if not the strongest, and at the sime time deprived the jedi of one of their most valuable members) and his ultimate disadvantage in the end, and Aankin turned out to be his demise.
    My point, Anankin, even though he became Vader, was the one that defeated Palpatine (I mean the physical auteur of the task), thus bringing balance to the force.
    If Anakin hadn't turned to the dark side, he probably would've, just the same (maybe even with the help of his children) defeated Palpatine one way or the other.
    He is the chosen one after all. He was meant all the way to redeem the republic (that would've fallen one way or the other, with vader or without vader), for we are forced to wonder at the end of ROTJ, that the ulitmate eveil that were the sith was destroyed, and that the republic that would follow the empire would be perfect, just and democratic as the old republic once was. This is a very important point. This is why we don't really need episodes 7, 8 and 9. At the end of ROTJ, we are suposed to believe that all thw wrongs in the universe were erased, thus bringing the star wars saga a conclusive, satisfactory and fairy-tale like ending. If the next trilogy was indeed made, it would've to have a nwe kind of menace or villain, and that would only diminish the impact of Anakin's journey and Luke's role in that Journey.
    Anakin is the saviour of the galaxy.
    The empire was not created by him. He helped a little, no doubt, but the empire was going to be created anyway.
    Anakin's fullest moment was when he killed palpatine, there he trully became the chosen one.
  11. Durwood Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2002
    star 5
    I have a little theory that Anakin would have brought balance to the force whether the Jedi discovered him or not. If it was truly his destiny as forseen by the force then he would have fulfilled it without intervention. It could be that the Jedi's interference, their attempt to force the prophesy to fulfill itself, may have been their undoing and made things a lot more difficult than they had to be.

    I have a scene that I would love to see (but probably won't because I've learned to not try and second guess Uncle George) where Qui-Gon returns in spirit form to address this:

    Qui-Gon: It was a mistake to train Anakin.

    Obi-Wan: But you insisted. You made me promise!

    Qui-Gon: I know, and it is a mistake that I deeply regret. Anakin is the Chosen One, and he would have fulfilled his destiny without our help. We were not supposed to get involved, I see that now. Anakin will bring balance to the force, but now, it is going to much harder on all of us.
  12. Merkel Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 21, 2002
    star 1
    That's interesting, Durwood.
  13. Obi-Can Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jun 29, 2002
    star 3
    How did Anakin bring balance to the force? At the end of ROTJ, there are no Sith left. This seems to indicate that the Good out weights the bad. When Anakin executes the Jedi one by one, he is systematically unbalancing the force again.

    I think the balance comes when we are in the midst of the Empire, right after Ep III and until the ROTJ. When we either have Sidious and DV /Yoda and Obi-Wan or when its Sidious and DV/Yoda and Luke. Two for Two. So Anakin or DV or who ever he is unbalances the force by killing himself and Sidious. Right?

    This Chosen One thing (Balancing the Force) doesn't make sense to me. I admit it.
  14. Durwood Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2002
    star 5
    I suspect that when the force is in balance, the light side prevails. The reason the force is out of balance is because of the Sith, so when the Sith are destroyed, balance will be restored. I don't think balance in this case means an equal measure of good and bad just as eating a balanced diet doesn't mean you consume equal portions of healthy food and junk.
  15. ophelia Cards Against Humanity Host. Ex-Mod

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Jun 25, 2002
    star 6
    Durwood wrote:

    I have a little theory that Anakin would have brought balance to the force whether the Jedi discovered him or not. If it was truly his destiny as forseen by the force then he would have fulfilled it without intervention.

    Interesting. It's true that no good ever seems to come from deliberately trying to fulfill a prophecy. Just ask Macbeth. :)
  16. naw ibo Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 18, 1999
    star 5
    Obi-Can, I don't believe it should be looked at as numerically balanced, but balanced as in harmony. Look at it like a living thing--when the body is in harmony, it is healthy.

    The Sith are like a cancer, disrupting harmony.

    Balance means harmony(also the term "light side" to my knowledge, is never used in the films, seems that the Jedi generally use the terms The Force and the Dark Side of the Force) The Force is in harmony, the Dark Side disrupts harmony. Thus it disrupts the balance.

    Oh it's always moving a little this way and a little that because entropy is a natural part of life, but the Dark Side actively encourages it and used destruction, disharmony, fear and death, etc to further it's own ends.

    So there is still that yin and yang element in the Force, what the Dark Side does is to try and push the dark side of that to take over and extend its boundaries.
  17. Jeff 42 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 14, 1998
    star 5
    "I have a little theory that Anakin would have brought balance to the force whether the Jedi discovered him or not. If it was truly his destiny as forseen by the force then he would have fulfilled it without intervention. It could be that the Jedi's interference, their attempt to force the prophesy to fulfill itself, may have been their undoing and made things a lot more difficult than they had to be."

    This is interesting, but I look at it a different way. If Anakin would have fulfilled the prophecy no matter what, then that would suggest he did not really have control over his destiny. This seems to remove the idea of personal responsibility. I think that even though bringing balance was his destiny, he had to take on the burden of that destiny for it to be fulfilled. By falling to the dark side he resisted his role as the Chosen One. He could have brought balance without all the pain and suffering caused by the Empire, but instead he chose to turn to evil and only years later did he finally fulfill his destiny thanks to his son's faith and love. If not for Luke, Anakin might never have fulfilled his destiny.
  18. Garth Maul Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2002
    star 6
    awesome, awesome posts.

    I LOVE the ideas being posted here.

    I seriously doubt an untrained Anakin could have restored balance to the Force.

    Restoring balance, according to Lucas, occurs at the end of ROTJ when the Sith no longer exist (Palpatine is dead, Vader is Anakin). The Sith DO act as a cancer, once the tumor is cut out, health (balance) is restored. Let's not forget that the Force is all about life; the DS is not.

    I was quite sure that debate, at least had been settled.

    I think it's pretty harsh on Lucas to accuse him of misogyny.

    Shmi did the right thing.

    Of course Anakin missed her, but this is one of the main problems of interpretation I've noticed on the board:

    IT'S QUI-GON'S FAULT, THEN OBI-WAN'S FOR ACCEPTING THE PLEDGE TO TRAIN ANAKIN, THEN THE COUNCIL'S FOR FINALLY AGREEING!!!

    Sorry about the caps, but it's kinda frustrating to get this point across.

    The Jedi Code has worked for THOUSANDS of years, and is usually STRICTLY ADHERED to.

    Why? Because if you start allowing exceptions, such as the age of the commencement of training, then you get people like Anakin screwing everything up.

    Anakin WAS too old to be trained; he had too much of an attachment to his mother, his only companion on Tatooine. It's not a bad thing at all, but it certainly does interfere with his training.

    And why exactly did they let Obi-Wan, who just got his driver's license, to train the Chosen One?

    I also think some of the users here are being pretty critical of Yoda and Obi-Wan. Luke was Anakin's son; they probably thought he'd have similar personality traits.

    They think he was not ready to face Vader (which he wasn't), and they also thought he might find out that Vader is his father, which could totally make him vulnerable (to the Dark Side).

    His father, Darth Vader, was a monster. Let's not be revisionist historians because he was redeemed in the end; he was a Galactic Hitler and the most feared man in the galaxy.

    They were also aware of the POWER of the Emperor, and could probably imagine the various ways Palpatine could benefit from having Darth Luke on his side.

    Luke was right in trusting his heart, but I agree with Ophelia and her comments on the nature of attachment in SW.

    See my 2nd-last post:

    Luke was able to act like the ultimate Jedi Knight, yet still redeem his father - and he essentially left the choice up to Vader. Luke was willing to die if necessary, and let Vader continue to exist as Vader, rather than either (a) killing his father and turning to the DS, or (b) killing the Emperor and joining Vader.

    I may be a law-and-order type guy (I'm in law school, for Pete's sake!), but I still think the Jedi Code is getting the shaft.

    I'm not denying it may seem harsh at times, but so what? That's what learning to be a Jedi is all about.

    And don't give me that crap that the Jedi don't love.

    Yoda was concerned about Padme at the start of AOTC.

    Obi-Wan, I'm sure, was concerned about Padme's fall off the ship, but he knew there was nothing they could do at this point except to continue on.

    I liked Durwood's comment: Lord give me the strength...etc.

    Keep up the good work, everybody.

    -dust
  19. ophelia Cards Against Humanity Host. Ex-Mod

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Jun 25, 2002
    star 6
    GARTH_MAUL wrote:

    I think it's pretty harsh on Lucas to accuse him of misogyny.

    I doubt he's actually a misogynist. He has two daughters, and, I believe, three older sisters. For that matter, I think at one point he considered switching Luke and Leia's roles, so that she would be the central character of SW. However, Jabbadabbadoo brought up some troubling points about the apparent contrast between mother/son love and father/son love.

    I suppose the problem could be our relative sample sizes. We see lots of "father/son" pairs throughout SW, but our view of mother/son relationships has been pretty limited. (We don't really get to see mother/daughter relations at all, other than the fact that Leia remembers Padmé a little). Maybe we're making false generalizations based on too little information.

    Another possibility is that the whole "loving men=okay but loving women=bad news!" thing is unintended baggage carried over from the traditional myths Lucas studied, and/or from Joseph Campbell's relative uninterest in female mythic figures. I mentioned the "connection to mommy=weakness" theme a few days ago.

    Finally, we may discover in Ep. III that Anakin's problem is not that he loved his mother, but the unhealthy way he loved his mother in AOTC. (Generally speaking, healthy love does not lead to the slaughter of innocents). However, this begs further questions. If Anakin's love for Shmi was unhealthy in AOTC, was it unhealthy in TPM? Did he have unhealthy feelings at birth? If not, where and how did things go wrong? The answer to this question would throw a lot of light on Anakin's relationship with Shmi, and on love in the GFFA in general.

    this is one of the main problems of interpretation I've noticed on the board:

    IT'S QUI-GON'S FAULT, THEN OBI-WAN'S FOR ACCEPTING THE PLEDGE TO TRAIN ANAKIN, THEN THE COUNCIL'S FOR FINALLY AGREEING!!!


    Ohhhhh . . . this again. ;) I spent much of last week duking those ideas out in the If you were Anakin's master, how would you control his "temper tantrums" thread.

    Without getting too deeply into it, I think the Jedi Code's inflexibility was not helpful to Anakin. The Order as a whole seems to have lost the ability to adapt, which is causing a lot of their problems.

    I may be a law-and-order type guy (I'm in law school, for Pete's sake!), but I still think the Jedi Code is getting the shaft.

    And I may be a bleeding-heart type, but I'm a special ed major. I have much faith in individualized instruction. :)
  20. Garth Maul Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2002
    star 6
    Another great post, Ophelia. I was exaggerating in a couple of places in my last post, but I still insist that many people on this board focus the blame on the Jedi Council, the Jedi Code, Obi-Wan, and Yoda.

    And that Anakin is just a victim or he's being used by the Code...not to mention that Qui-Gon is in no ways responsible, using a cheap deathbed promise tactic on Obi-Wan!

    Hmm...on "misogyny": Leia was an extremely strong character, especially contrasted with Luke in ANH. She always seemed in control.

    I agree that it's quite possible that there was "vestigial misogyny" in SW simply from Lucas' Campbellian perusal.

    Perhaps...the whole redemption thing worked better with father and son than it would have with mother and son. Plus, if Darth Vader was female, there would be even more talk of Lucas hating women! Or father and daughter...mother and daughter?

    I dunno...I can see your point.

    And I think everyone on this board makes massive generalizations based on limited information.:)

    -dust
  21. Green_Destiny_Sword Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 20, 2001
    star 4
    OPHELIA--- How does having 2 daughters NOT make one a mysoginist?? You say like it he chose to have daughters. Or sisters for that matter. And even if he did, that would still not mean he doesn't have bigoted feelings towards women.

    I also disagree with your assessment of Anakin's love for Shmi. You say it's unhealthy because Anakin killed people who were connected to those responsible for hear death. but was it love or Anakin's demented personality? He is a violent, unruly, amoral person. He does not have any respect for authority or laws. He's also incredibly impulsive. So to me, the root of his slaughter of the Tuskens was not in any love for Shmi, but his own emotional damage and issues.

    And while the Order was irresponsible for not trying to deal with Anakin's attachment issues (and we don't really know this, we have no idea really. For all we know, he could have received years of counseling on this), this whole idea of inflexibility and arrogance is overblown to me. Where does this play a role in the problems the Order has encountered in the PT? I don't see it. We just talk about it a lot on here but I never really saw this manifest in the movie.

    THe OT PROVED that a teenager could be trained effectively enough to wield the lightsaber and resist the darkside even in the midst of the ultimate emotional conflict. Luke has every reason to turn to the dark side and unleash its fury on vader. Yet he resisted. So I don't see why it had to be different for Anakin who was 9.
  22. anidanami124 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 24, 2002
    star 6
    GDS If you want to believe that go head it is after all only your opinin.
  23. Green_Destiny_Sword Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 20, 2001
    star 4
    ANIDAMAI124 said: "GDS If you want to believe that go head it is after all only your opinin. "

    Ahh...such wisdom.

    Thanks.
  24. anidanami124 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 24, 2002
    star 6
    I don't know what you ment by that. But it's true you have your opinin I have my own opinin. In the end konw one but GL knows waht's going to happen in Ep 3. So I say if you don't like what he gave us so far. write a fanfic the way you think SW Ep1-6 should be like. This is GL's and he can write it how he want's to. It's just we can't read in to ever thing we see in the movie.
  25. ShaneP Ex-Mod Officio

    Member Since:
    Mar 26, 2001
    star 6
    Durwood, great idea about Jinn appearing to Obi-Wan expressing regret about deciding to train Anakin in spite of the balance issue happening anyway.

    Nice.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.