PT Yoda: "Train yourself to let go of everything you fear to lose." (PLEASE SEE WARNING ON PAGE 14)

That doesn't mean it's only about humans.

 

Yoda's line is one of the best in the prequels here. Many have perceived it as cold and insensitive on his part. But in my headcanon, Yoda knows about Anakin's problems. I don't need to look at the 2D/3D stories to see that, although I appreciate both. Nor am I required to read the books for that, although I believe we should value the Clone Wars era of the EU particularly in times of war in our real world. Moral ambiguity is written all over the prequels.

There is nothing wrong with saying that Yoda made mistakes. He could neither forestall nor prevent Order 66 from Sidious. Sidious played one difficult game with Yoda's head and vulnerabilities. That shows Yoda's own inherent humanity. He is noble, but he is not all-knowing. He is a Master of Jedi past his prime, but he is still a force with whom few would dare reckon. He's the grandfather many would need to have. He's lovable, but he's also stern. That is illustrated in his concern for both Anakin and his son, Luke. He's harsh and less forgiving than Obi-Wan, but we all need a teacher, a mentor, like that in our lives. I would recommend Emerson's interpretation of the antimentor concept. An antimentor is more than a mentor. It's a profound state of mind. Many people on the JCF seek that state of mind, and that's why we are glad to call this website a home, or in some cases, a fam.

Yoda was telling Anakin what we all need to hear: You must love yourself first. Don't prop yourself up with anyone. Anakin always needed someone: His mother, Padme, Obi-Wan, R2, Ahsoka, and others. He did not rely on his own strength. He was known as a hero with no fear, but his fear ate at his heart. This is why Matt Strover utilized the dragon analogy. He wasn't trying to say that Anakin was just meant to be a monster. He was saying that there is a dragon within us all. Yoda was encouraging Anakin to love and protect himself, which is sometimes a very difficult thing for many to hear. Taking it in is essential. It's always an individual quest. The individual must teach themselves. That is the greatest struggle.

Yoda showed humility by understanding this concept. All people, all sentient beings, grasp the struggle at various points in their lives. A red knight only lives for others, not themselves. A white knight only cares about slaying dragons in order to show off for others. A black knight knows how to protect herself or himself, and the black knight helps people along the way, even if they are unappreciated by the masses. Many nations are led by too many white and red knights, and history has very few black knights.

Thus, Yoda was encouraging Anakin to take the black knight path. He had undertaken it himself before, evidently. Some have compared this notion to what Lumiya told Jacen before he became Caedus. (Since that story is bashed and compared to the prequels, I think it's worth mentioning here. You can find things to appreciate in both the prequels and EU. They are filled with moral ambiguity and lessons, regardless of original intent.) I dispute that this is similar to what Lumiya would advise, but she did have a point. Peace for worlds can be more important than endless wars and perpetual dysfunctions. Perhaps if individuals all saw this, the world would be different, albeit still grey.

Anyhow, that's my point. Yoda never wanted to preserve himself or his way forever. He wanted peace, but he knew he could not force it.



Concentrate!

 

Star Wars (and all fiction) is about Human concerns and Human nature. This is simply because we are the only intelligent life-form that we know of, so we only have one case study to base everything off.

So in terms of character, most Star Wars aliens are functionally identical to human, but with different skin colour or horns or whatever. Them being alien rarely affects the plot.

Take Maul for example. Change him to human and his character doesn't change in the least.

So it seems perfectly reasonable to refer to characters as Human.

 

To you. I like the diversity among species, reflecting what a society with operational space travel would look like.

 

But you keep missing the point that it's all cosmetic. There is no real diversity between species in Star Wars--or most any popular sci fi series--because the aliens are at best just representations of different aspects of human nature. Yoda being an alien doesn't have any effect on his characterization; he has a functionally human characterization. And the same goes for every other alien character in the series.

Star Wars doesn't in any way truly examine what a society with beings possessing vastly different psychologies and evolved moral senses would be like. It's a series about characters who all think, act, and interact in recognizably human ways. That's because it is, at its core, a timeless allegory about the story of humanity.

 

You're changing your tune. Originally you said:

So you were wrong. It's about multiple alien species, and human nature.

 

Good freaking Lord.

 

removed - bait

 

I assume you’re joking?

 

removed - bait

 

removed - bait

 

removed - no personal attacks

 

removed - bait

 

I guess my profile pic comes I handy for the ignoring part..

 

Oh golly.

Well, I guess we can salvage some of the discussion that was quite interesting concerning will power.

The notion of self-sufficiency is certainly interesting one to incorporate into the Jedi philosophy. I think it is debatable whether Yoda was teaching self-love, or whether he was really instructing Anakin to have faith in the Will of the Force. Of course, Yoda would never consider surrendering oneself to the Force as a "prop" or a form of dependency - on the contrary it is a liberating force, and a revelation. Perhaps it is more accurate to say that Yoda warned against corporeal attachments, physical dependencies and connections. They have a finite, limited quality which the Force surpasses. At worst, they corrupt, and warp our natures.

I agree that the Stover metaphor is a good one - but the individual's quest is less about the humanist notion of self-love, but rather the quest to know that the greatest love and protection comes through the conduit of the Force itself. Yoda's teachings, and the the teachings of the Jedi are the deontological method of coming as close as possible to the Force's greatness in this regard.

 

Great food for thought, Illama. Subjectivism is an interesting topic. Some people like to debate (ethically) nihilism vs. absurdism vs. atheist existentialism vs. theist existentialism. I was trying to go with the third one for the sake of argument. Personally, I think that the individual could liberate themselves without the Force, but some need it. Depends on one's perspective.

 

I quite agree - I think one must take care to associate the Force too closely with the notion of religious belief - there are some important distinctions, of course - there is an underpinning spiritual quality. Many of the conflicts in the SW saga are shaped around the idea of rejecting the truth in the Force.

There have been a number of characters in SW, particularly the EU, who have tried to challenge the all powerful Will of the Force. The Sith less so challenge it, more so corrupt it, by misusing the gifts given by the Force (namely being able to use and feel the Force as an energy field) - a sort of betrayal, if you like. That is quite a biblical reading, however, and isn't too everyone's liking.

 

YES, Illama!

 

Lucas created the Force as an analogy of religious belief. That was one of the first things he was trying to come up with when writing the first draft of ANH.