PT Anakin's Turn : Did you like it? What would you have changed?

I suppose I just never saw Vader as attempting to reach out to others or longing for human contact. He seems to isolate himself from humanity, such as when he is in his meditation chamber in ESB and does not reach out to the flawed humans (but not monsters) that his officers are. More than anything, I get the impression that Vader sees himself as a monster.

Having read that section, I'm glad Lucas chose to go the way he did. For me, Anakin fully believing in the Jedi's betrayal and turning solely because of political reasons seems a touch disconnected from ROTJ. In particular, I think back to his line of "Obi-Wan once thought as you do" where he does not seem to wholly regard Obi-Wan as a traitor. Despite all that has happened, I think that Anakin recognizes that the Jedi did not turn against the Republic, per se, but that they were a threat to the Empire. The way the movie plays out, he rationalizes their destruction as being for the good of the galaxy and looks at Mace's refusal to simply arrest Palpatine as a pivot point.

The original turn also, I think, does not emphasize Anakin's attachment enough which was heavily stressed throughout TPM (the council chamber) and AOTC (his mother's death and the discussion with Padme of attachment). It also ties into the temptation of Luke better, I think.

Also, I think I should just admit by bias upfront but...I have a few gripes with zombie in that, while he's entitled to his own opinion, I don't trust his editing and would really have to see the sources of his arguments. In particular, he excised portions of Lucas's 1988 Berne convention speech that I, personally, think renders his arguments moot. But that's a discussion for another time I suppose.

Is it really unconvincing though? Especially after what happens in the OT? He stands by and allows a planet (with millions of innocent civilian children on it) to be destroyed for absolutely no reason at all. Seriously, there was no strategic purpose to the destruction of Alderaan, it's never brought up again in the later films and it didn't even get them the location of the rebel base. Or is the fact that ANH basically tells us that Vader committed genocide not enough indication? Why is it that suddenly, when we see these crimes onscreen, Anakin becomes a sociopath, but when they are described (but not shown) in the OT, he can still be a redeemed? It boggles my mind, to be honest.

Really, the Jedi Temple is not only a school. It is a military organization, staffed by generals and their students. The children there receive combat training -- hence the lightsaber scene with Yoda and the younglings. Look at what Luke accomplished with only three years of training after all. I don't see how killing the younglings (who could actually pose a threat) is worse than standing by and allowing Alderaan to be destroyed; I really don't.

Especially when you consider that Anakin himself was regularly placed in life-threatening situations as a child and that he's been fighting a war with an army of 10-year-old children for three years.

I'll be honest, I find that Palpatine meets the criteria for a sociopath. But Anakin? Hardly. He strikes me more as a soldier committing atrocities and justifying his actions through the regime. For one, Anakin isn't manipulative and he feels guilt and regret over his actions. The coldness and shallowness of emotions is also absent since one of Anakin's issues seems to be that he wears his heart on his sleeve and can't control emotions.

Really, I find the term "sociopath" is used far too often when individuals commit atrocities. To me, it seems to be a label used to dehumanize others, almost to suggest that a normal person could never be capable under any circumstances of carrying out such acts. It's like people have to reassure themselves that they would never do such horrible things because they weren't "born evil." But that's just my take on the matter.

Edit: sorry for the double post

That seems to be the way his past is sketched as well.

That's my take on it as well, PiettsHat. Labeling and dismissing is far easier than looking at the complexity behind the events of the prequels (or any similar real world tragedy).

I'd personally rather examine reasons in order to learn how to prevent similar tragedies in real life, or in Anakin's case, how his tragedy could have been prevented, but that's me.

He definitely isolates himself. I was just imagining a scenario where he does it out of perceived necessity in service to his goals of domination. Luke showing up, bringing back memories of his former self, may have reminded him of something he had repressed in himself, and made him re-evaluate the necessity of his methods. He might have originally turned himself into a monster on purpose, in service of the greater good.

I guess that's kind of what happened anyway, but the motivation, as someone else posted, just seems so out-of-scale to what he does. I really should rewatch all the films and see what really works and doesn't, for me. It's been so long since I've seen them.

Does Obi-Wan ever think as Luke does in the PT as it stands, though? Plus, the Anakin-rushing-to-Padme scene after the assault on the Temple seems to be from the original version... and Anakin says there that he can only hope Kenobi has remained loyal to the Chancellor. So to whatever degree Anakin thinks of Obi-Wan as a traitor, that part remains in the final film anyway.

The attachment point is a good one... though it could in theory work as well with his initial loss of attachment coming from some events in the Wars or their aftermath, and his subsequent motivations being overtly political but being tied to that same fear of loss.

I guess I could buy the turn being Padme-focused much more readily if the remaining bits from the original version were not littering the second half of the film. As it is, while good explanations (like yours) can make it fit, it takes more effort than it feels like it should for me to accept.

Regarding zombie, maybe we should make another thread on the theatrical version preservation issue?

Agreed.

Not sure who you're arguing against here, but I made no distinction with Alderaan. And I find Anakin's supposed redemption just as unconvincing as his supposed fall.

Sociopaths are not always devoid of emotion. But they are devoid of empathy. What, exactly, does Anakin feel guilt and regret for? I would argue that he feels regret only that he has broken the Code that has been instilled in him, and indeed he expresses it in precisely those terms on more than one occasion. Like many sociopaths, he craves power, and within the structure of the Order, adherence to the Code is the surest path to power.

He lashes out at the Tuskens because they took one of his possessions (and one that he gave up remarkably easily himself in TPM) and we never see him express remorse for the actual crime. What we see instead is him quickly proclaiming that he will be "the most powerful Jedi ever".

Sociopathy should never be equated with being "born evil". And you're right that it is a dehumanizing label. But sometimes, that's perfectly appropriate.

No non-sociopathic person is capable of Anakin's actions in ROTS according to the rationale presented to us. That italicised part is important. Do I think that a non-sociopathic person could convince themselves to commit such atrocities against their own people? Possibly. But they would need a strong rationale. The one that Anakin uses is extremely weak. It's so weak, in fact, that the only logical conclusion is that he has no feeling for anyone but himself, and no sense of what we would call morality.

Some things are indeed complex and ambiguous. I can't see how this is one of them. There is absolutely no justification for what he does except a vague promise that it might help him avert a prophecy from his nightmares. That's one step up from "because I felt like it".

Labeling is not dismissing. Quite the opposite. In fact, if we had an effective system for identifying sociopathic tendencies in individuals at an early age- i.e. proper labeling- then we might be able to avert destructive behaviours in later life.

It actually doesn't matter. Aside from the fact that Obi-Wan tried to convince Anakin to back down on Mustafar, which is really enough, Anakin/Vader is going by what Padme told him.

Fixed one word in your post and with it, this is the one sentence I agree with.

But labeling tendencies or behaviors does not equal labeling people. And PiettsHat and I were discussing the labeling of overall character. There is a monumental difference between labeling a tendency or behavior so that that can be addressed--preferably early in life, as you said--as opposed to labeling a person, which is usually done so that one can subsequently add, "To hell with him/her. He's just a [fill in the blank], I don't care."

A monumental difference between labeling a behaviour, and labeling a person? I disagree. If I consistently exhibit anti-social behaviour, then it would be fair and accurate to call me an anti-social person, no? As the famous quote puts it: "We are what we repeatedly do."

If I consistently exhibit anti-social behaviour, then it would be fair and accurate to call me an anti-social person, no?

Not really, unless being anti-social is all that you are, and you have no other traits whatsoever. What if you are anti-social but also enjoy solving math problems, gardening and reading science fiction?

People are complex creatures, much too complex to be defined even by a series of behaviors. I in no way believe that "people are what they repeatedly do."

Well, people ARE what they repeatedly do, but what they repeatedly do (as you note) includes multitudes of behaviors and thoughts. So I agree with your content but perhaps not form.

For me, I suppose, the idea that Vader turned himself into a monster on purpose seems to conflict with his sense of regret in ROTJ. I think you're correct in stating that Luke would bring up memories from the past and have unearthed repressed feelings, but with ROTJ, I get the impression that Vader is almost fatalistic. He seems to see his past as having him trapped in a situation that perhaps may not be what he had wanted or envisioned. In particular, Vader seems to rely on the notion of destiny to comfort himself -- as though there's no point in fighting it anymore because this is the way it has to be. Luke, in my opinion, really saves him by showing him that it is possible for him to resist what he has become, to change if he wants to, no matter the cost.

I think that the reason Anakin's response seems so out-of-scale with his situation is because it looks as though he makes a snap decision to trade Padme's life for the life of everyone in the Jedi Order. I don't necessarily think that's true though. I think the prequels do a very good job of showing how frustrated and angry Anakin is at the current system, how powerless he feels and how he despises his lack of control. I think that the movies also show how, despite Anakin being a member of the Jedi Order in name, he hardly seems to have the close familial ties that someone like Obi-Wan would have. For me, Anakin's submission to Palpatine is essentially him giving in. That fatalistic sense overwhelms him and so he chooses to betray his allies, with the rationalization that after what he's done he really has no choice, that it will make the galaxy better, and it will let him save his wife.

To be honest, one reason the death of the younglings (although it initially shocked me) doesn't surprise me upon reflection is because Anakin has never seems to have been shown that the weak or innocent are to be protected. He himself was exploited as a child but, for me, the biggest factor is the fact that the clones themselves are essentially children.

In my view, how can you expect a man, who has been called a hero for leading 10 year old kids into battle, to have any compunctions about destroying any threats he sees? Even if those threats are only young children. I'm not trying to downplay what Anakin did -- he murdered children. But, to me, it comes across as less out-of-scale when you consider that he likely has a warped vision of normalcy.

I always felt that Anakin, despite how far he falls by the end of the film, shows more hesitancy in attacking Obi-Wan than any other Jedi. I found it interesting, for example, that Lucas decided to include a conversation between Obi-Wan and Anakin on Mustafar. Theoretically, he could have started the duel by having Obi-Wan attack Anakin as he was choking Padme. The way they circle around each other and try to legitimize their actions (particularly Anakin) I thought was suggestive of the fact that, despite their status as enemies, both of them were conflicted about having to kill each other. In particular, I always liked that Obi-Wan is the first to light his saber, but it is Anakin who launches the first attack. I might be reading too much into that scene, though.

That's a fair point. For me, the turn works because I found that both TPM and AOTC, while laying out why Anakin has grievances with the political system, showed that his major stressors were from fear of losing his loved ones. The turn then really culminated well for me by having Anakin finally succumb to that pressure while using his political beliefs as justification. I can see why it doesn't work for you though -- the original turn, as described by zombie would have made Anakin's sentiments towards the Jedi much clearer. The lack of focus on fear of loss, though, I think would have really hurt my understanding of the films and my personal interpretation of the thematic points. After all, Yoda says, "Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering." I really feel that fear had to be Anakin's main motivator, not political dissatisfaction or misplaced idealism. I can appreciate, though, that the film is less coherent because of it, but I think it still makes sense when you take into account the prior build-up throughout AOTC and early in ROTS as Anakin shows his dissatisfaction with the Jedi.

Perhaps. I know people have very strong feelings on the issue, though, so I'm a little hesitant. Really, for me, the issue is that zombie uses Lucas's 1988 speech to paint him as a hypocrite while I think reading that speech in its entirety perfectly explains why the special editions exist and why Lucas will not release the O-OT. But some of it is a matter of interpretation, I suppose.

Ah, my apologies then. I made the presumption that you were arguing that his fall is not convincing because it does not fit with Anakin's redemption in the OT. If you're suggesting that his redemption was unconvincing in the first place, in ROTJ, then I agree, that's a topic for debate. I'll go ahead and state that my opinion is that while Anakin can never make up for what he did to his victims, nor should they feel obligated to forgive him (unless they so choose), that I don't believe that he is beyond redemption. I personally don't believe in the notion of an "unforgivable crime." To me, it's nihilistic and it seems only destructive. I think it only leads to people without hope, who no longer have any reason to believe that they can be better.

I think it's not fair to say that Anakin can't feel empathy. He dies to save another person, after all, his son Luke. His first words, upon having undergone a horrific surgery, are to ask if Padme is alright, instead of concern for himself. He wants to go back and help the clone pilots during the battle over Coruscant. He refuses to leave Obi-Wan behind during the escape from the Invisible Hand. Obi-Wan reminding him of what Padme would do in his situation is what convinces him to leave her behind.

I don't think the films show that Anakin regrets only breaking the Code. He clearly doesn't hold that much regard for it, considering he happily broke it to marry Padme. Concerning the slaughter confession scene, note that when Padme asks him what is wrong, he does not reply with the fact that his mother is dead or state that he broke the code. What is wrong is that he killed the Tuskens. Look more closely at the scene and you will see that he brokenly stares at his hands as he confesses.

Or the balcony scene on Mustafar is another example of regret -- here he is poised (in his own mind), to gaining control of an Empire and having the power to save his wife. So why is he crying? If he truly only cared for power and status, then why, as he is poised to gain significant standing, is he weeping?

I also think it's unfair to say that he gave his mother up remarkably easily. Shmi herself had to remind him not to look back. And scenes on the ship and on Coruscant showed that he missed her and was worried about her -- "afraid to lose her, I think?" and "your thoughts dwell on your mother."

I would never say that it is ever perfectly appropriate to dehumanize an individual. Dehumanization is what causes atrocities; it does not resolve them. That's what the Nazis did when they described the Jews as "rats" what the Hutus did to the Tutsis by calling them "cockroaches," what every piece of wartime propaganda has ever been about -- see American cartoons of the Japanese during WWII. All life is equal (at least from my point of view).

Yes, I could see many many people acting in the same manner as Anakin had they experienced similar circumstances. It's interesting, but on the old forums, there was a poll asking "what would you have done if it had been your mother?" and a majority of people stated that they probably would have done as Anakin did. In actuality, the ability to commit such atrocities is based, in part, on dehumanization. Anakin felt extremely alienated by the Jedi Order and thus when he gained a new label, Sith, he could rationalize their destruction as for the greater good.

There's also the fact that he believes that joining with Palpatine will allow him to bring peace, justice, freedom, and security to the Empire. And that he sees that he's already damned himself by being an accomplice in Windu's murder. And that Anakin is no longer able to trust the Jedi themselves -- as Palpatine notes, even as Anakin is leaving to tell Windu, he's not sure what they are going to do and although Anakin intends to find the truth of the situation, he's still extremely conflicted.

You're probably already familiar with this, but looking at labeling theory, I'd agree that it's not dismissing, but I would argue it only makes things worse:

"The theory is concerned with how the self-identity and behavior of individuals may be determined or influenced by the terms used to describe or classify them. It is associated with the concepts of self-fulfilling prophecy and stereotyping. The theory was prominent during the 1960s and 1970s, and some modified versions of the theory have developed and are still currently popular. Unwanted descriptors or categorizations - including terms related to deviance, disability or diagnosis of a mental disorder - may be rejected on the basis that they are merely "labels", often with attempts to adopt a more constructive language in its place. A stigma is defined as a powerfully negative label that changes a person's self-concept and social identity. "

Identify someone as sociopathic and treat him as such and he will tend to display more sociopathic characteristics. It's the problem of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Look at inner city schools: people expect little of those children, have such low expectations of them, that those kids often conform to what others believe about them. Studies have also shown that telling a teacher that a normal-scoring child is gifted will often cause that teacher to alter their behavior towards that child which will be reflected in higher test scores.

Look at Anakin -- as soon as he's brought to the Jedi Temple, he is told that his future is clouded and called dangerous. Is it really surprising, then, that Anakin grew up to be dangerous and unpredictable when that was what was expected of him?

There is a lot of thoughts in the above threads - too much to digest all at once - but on one point, sure the Clones were 10 years old but due to accelerated growth, they were adults as well. I would hardly call them 10 year old children, yet I fully recognized they did not have a normal growing/learning life - but it's not really clear whether accelerated growth/aging is accompanied by accelerated maturity mentally or emotionally.

Not something I'd argue one way or the other, but if I were working personally with the clones, I'm afraid I'd see them as adults even if I intellectually knew they were 10 physical years old.

Seeing Anakin as essentially having a warped view of the universe and how to interact with other people, while probably accurate, might just be what rubs me the wrong way. Because I see these films as myths in which the viewer is invited to identify with the protagonist(s). With Luke, it's fairly easy for me to do (though I'm aware I am not everyone), because even though Luke has a unique background, he is mostly an "everyman," if a talented one. Anakin (if he does indeed have a warped version of 'normalcy') is harder for me to inhabit mentally. Perhaps this is intentional, making us have to try to empathize with harder-to-identify-with people. (With the late changes to the story, I'm not sure about that, though.) It's purely personal preference, but I think a story that basically mirrors Luke's but tells us what happens if he "chooses the blue pill," as it were, would be strengthened if he did it intentionally (like if Luke turned on Bespin, in order to save his friends right then and there) instead of being trapped from the start.

Also, I don't think that Anakin's political or social motivations are mutually exclusive with his fear of loss. For example, if more blame were placed on the Jedi for keeping him from his mother when she needed him, or his fear for Padme's life was somehow tied to the Jedis' philosophy (both of which have seeds in the films as they are), and he joined Palpatine's Empire to prevent such things from happening again (in other words, if his personal issues led to a true falling-out with the Jedi and their way of doing things), it could all come together for me. The way it plays now, Anakin's personal fears, his dissatisfaction with the Jedi, and his authoritarian-leaning political stance are all introduced in episodes I and II, but for the first half of ROTS his single motivator appears to be Padme (despite lip service to the other aspects, they don't really seem to animate him) - and then in the second half, the others seem to come back out as if he really believes them. As I said, your reading makes more sense of this than I thought plausible before, but it's still a bit incoherent.

In terms of the clones, one of the reasons I have a hard time viewing them as full adults is because people largely mature through experience. Making choices, failing, discovering the world on our own is really essential to growing into adulthood. The clones, although they may have the physical and intellectual capacity of regular twenty year old men, are lacking that experience. It's difficult, therefore, for me to not perceive them as child-like to some degree.

To be honest, though, although the use of clones bothers me, I feel like there really was little choice. With the Separatists attacking, the Republic's only option (since it didn't have its own army) was to use them or capitulate to the Separtists. Moreover, what exactly would the Kaminoans have done with the clones if the Republic had not taken them? I can't see them feeding and housing billions (or trillions) of men out of the goodness of their hearts. They likely would have been killed or sold to the highest bidder (most likely the Separtists, in this case). At the very least, the Jedi showed respect and camaraderie towards the clones.

I understand your concern with my viewpoint of Anakin. I'll admit, one reason I think Luke is much easier to embrace as a protagonist is that he is much more relatable. He is an everyman as you say and, until he's twenty, has lived relatively mundane existence (at least as far as the films portray): he went to school, dreamed of going to the academy and exploring the world, hung out with his friends, raced around town, and worked on the family farm. Not too out of the ordinary.

Unfortunately, Anakin inhabits a world very alien to our own -- he grew up as a slave, professionally racing, then was sent to be raised as a warrior-priest. I think the prequels do a good job of showing how Anakin essentially struggles for a normal life in spite of this. His mother does a pretty good job raising him into a rather ordinary kid, albeit with some extraordinary abilities. And Anakin wishes quite strongly for a wife, a family, and the ability to help others across the universe. But much of this is undercut by his circumstances -- you can see his resentment of his situation in TPM ("I'm a person and my name is Anakin" and "Yeah, it'd be a pity if you had to pay for me"). Then there's his struggle with rules and restrictions (such as no attachment/possession) that are very alien to the audience. I think Anakin's story is as much about the corruption of a youth by a toxic system as it is about a man's own personal failings.

I think you're correct about the ties between Anakin's fear of loss and his political and social motivators. One instance that strikes me in particular is the fact that Anakin refused to seek Obi-Wan's counsel about his situation with Padme after his mother died. There's also the scene where Obi-Wan and Anakin argue about going back to help the clones during the opening battle. It emphasizes, I think, the Jedi's tendency towards big-picture thinking while Anakin's motivations tend to be more intimate in nature. In terms of the political situation, you see Anakin and Obi-Wan discussing Palpatine's new powers and how Anakin views it positively as he hopes it will end the war. Unfortunately, his close relationship with Palpatine breeds distrust between him and the Jedi.

Also (and I think this is a significant point to note), notice that ROTS invokes lack of trust a great deal. Anakin doesn't trust Obi-Wan with personal matters, but Obi-Wan trusts him with his life. The Council (and Mace in particular) do not trust Anakin, which Anakin himself percieves (and unfortunately extends to Obi-Wan). Palpatine himself feeds into this cycle by reminding Anakin that the Jedi don't trust him and then engineering situations in which this can become apparent (such as with the capture of Grevious). All this, together I find, builds to form a set of circumstances where Anakin no longer has anyone to confide in -- he attempts to trust Palpatine, but then Palpatine reveals he is a Sith Lord and has been deceiving him. In attempting to turn to the Council, Anakin is again conflicted and trying to do the right thing, but is on such unstable ground that he goes to make sure Palpatine's arrest plays out how he expects it to. My understanding is that by the time Anakin kneels before Palpatine, he's essentially been completely disillusioned with both the Jedi and his "friend" the Chancellor that he decides to carve his own path in desperation. This eventually culminates when he tells Padme "we don't have to run away anymore...you and I can rule the galaxy, make things the way we want them to be."

Then that person may well be an anti-social, sci-fi reading, mathematician gardener. Where did I say that you could only have one trait? That would have been a ludicrous thing to propose.

So for the sake of clarification, let me state: Anakin was not solely a sociopath.

I'm not sure what my stance is on unforgivable crimes- I go back and forth on that one.

But I do believe one thing with certainty: if redemption is possible, I don't think that Anakin could earn it through a single act.

I would argue that all these things are examples of a man who is vehemently opposed to losing his possessions, a quality that is understandable in a former slave. Padme is his prize possession, and thus his life revolves around her to a certain extent. She is better than any pod, any C-3PO. But he does not value her as a person. This is why his seduction of her is so clumsy (and, I would argue, Force-assisted) and why he fails to include her in any of his ROTS decision-making.

Sociopaths can still feel emotion, and they can still learn to project simulacrums of guilt and pain and loyalty. They can attempt to convince even themselves.

I admit that him marrying Padme seems, at first glance, to contrast with my theory about his adherence to the Code. However, there's another way to look at it. After slaying the Tuskens, he realises for the first time that he can break the Code (and the values that have been drilled into him) as long as he keeps it secret. And so that's precisely what he does with Padme. By the time he is ready to go public with their marriage, he has accumulated enough power and influence that the Code no longer holds any utility for him. And we see where that leads him.

I should note here that I am aware my reading of the films is a controversial one, is not the majority opinion and certainly not the author's intent. However, as I'll cover below, I feel it is the only way to make sense of an otherwise nonsensical character arc.

Oh, I agree. I don't mean dehumanization in that sense. Though perhaps there is no other sense? In hindsight, it may have been a poor choice of words.

My point was that there is nothing wrong with saying that the very worst actions of a mass murderer are inhuman, or other-than-human. There is nothing wrong with setting out the scope of what it means to be human, and condemning an atrocity as lying outside of it. This is moral clarity. This is saying "this far, and no further". I know that there is a prevailing school of thought that essentially says "anyone is capable of anything", but I don't agree with it, and frankly think it is about as nihilistic a notion as it gets.

And, most significantly, I certainly don't agree that anyone is capable of doing what Anakin did using the reasons that he did it.

The Tusken massacre alone is not indicative of any deeper character traits. I am not surprised that a lot of people claim they would do the same. It is only damning for Anakin in the context of his later actions, because once he realised he could do it and get away with it, he did it again, and again.

The more appropriate question to our discussion is: what would you do if it had been your wife?

And if people answer that they would do the same- that they would march a thousand soldiers into their adolescent home and start slaughtering every man, woman and child- then I would find it extremely disturbing.

I do think the films would have been better off emphasising political rather than personal motivations for Anakin.

As it is, his distrust for the Jedi seems to come out of nowhere. Yes, they've made some serious mistakes in the war, and they've mishandled him to a certain extent. His retaliation is grossly disproportionate.

This is all it takes for him to turn upon the people who have been his friends and comrades for ten years? This is all it takes for him to suddenly view scores of infants as legitimate military targets? To respond to the query of a frightened youngling with the snap-hiss of his lightsaber, just a few hours after he was still a sworn protector to these children? This is the man you were trying to convince me is someone who feels empathy for others?

Even after killing Mace, he still has options. He hasn't damned himself simply because he rashly assisted in one murder. He could flee and warn the Temple. He could try and contact Obi-Wan. And if really doesn't trust the Jedi, then he could just take Padme and run. Heck, he could even go into hiding and watch Order 66 go down around him. Instead he actively leads it. On the basis of next to nothing. Practically on a whim. It's sick.

Even then, he does nothing to try and mitigate the order. He doesn't argue for simply cutting off the leadership, or killing the council. He doesn't argue for taking out the Temple adults and then quarantining the place. He doesn't even try. He just says "right, I've helped you kill Mace. What's next, slaughtering kids? As you wish." It's absurd. It's insane. It's not something anyone with a semblance of morality would even consider.

Your opinion is considered and well-put. I disagree with it because I believe the problem of labeling stems from the stigma of certain labels- as your quote mentions- rather than the act of labeling itself. Labeling functions in many ways, at all levels of society, without notice. He is your postman, she is your doctor. He is a vegetarian, she is a vegan. He is autistic, she is dyslexic.

I myself had a minor mental impairment in my youth. Without being told what I was going through- without being "labeled" as a sufferer of the condition- I would have become more frustrated at my perceived inadequacies. But once I was given that label- and treated with patience and understanding- then in time, I came to own it and eventually discard it altogether.

It's the patience and understanding bit that's key. It's how people treat "labels" that matters, not the labels themselves. You pointed out, quite rightly, that some people equate being a sociopath with being "born evil". This is of course a misconception. But it doesn't stem from the fact that we have a label called "sociopath". It stems from the fact that people don't understand what that label means, and consequently their view of it is coloured by ignorance.

That was an excellent post, especially the last part where you exemplified how labels are not necessarily dehumanizing or dismissing people, and can even be helpful, depending on when and how they're applied.

Furthermore, I have to say I agree with this portion here:

I have also too often seen the moment he cuts off Mace's hand as supposedly a point of no return where he now will in no way be accepted by the Jedi if he returns, or that while that may not be the case, Anakin perceives it that way. But there's no reason why he should perceive it that way. It sure looked like an accident, and even if it wasn't, he could have easily explained it that way. He wouldn't even have to reveal that he did it. He could just leave that part out. He could even lie about that he went back at all. Furthermore, by warning the Temple of what was about to happen, he would show that his loyalty is still with them. Even if he admitted to a mistaken rash decision in a heated moment that cost Mace his life, he would surely redeem himself by way of warning the Jedi about the impending threat. The Jedi with all their big picture view of things, would not begrudge Anakin one mistake (and Palpatine was the one who killed him, Anakin just cut his hand in an attempt to uphold the Jedi Code, might I add) and dismiss his warning of the Temple ahead of time, which would save the lives of many Jedi.

And, like Winged Jedi says, supposing that he doesn't want to go back to the Jedi either and is somehow very disillusioned by them, there's still a third option, which is to run away. Why MUST he choose? Sidious moments later reveals that he doesn't know the secret to preserving life either, and that he just had been dangling that carrot in front of his face, even as he was unable to offer that carrot. Clearly, Sidious can't be trusted either, and is revealed to have manipulated Anakin half his life for his own selfish gain. This would be an appropriate moment for Anakin to question EVERYTHING in his life and just run away. Sidious, apparently, as he just revealed, doesn't know the secret to preserving/saving life, so he is of no pragmatic use to Anakin either. And now this demonstrably (to Anakin) untrustworthy manipulative false scheming man is ordering him to commit a massacre on his childhood home. People that he has known for more than a decade of his life. Disillusioned with both sides as he is, the thing that would make sense to do would be to just choose to run away. But he doesn't.

Where did I say that you could only have one trait?

You didn't, but you are claiming that people are defined by their traits, and I disagree with that.

It's the patience and understanding bit that's key. It's how people treat "labels" that matters, not the labels themselves.

I agree. However, in most instances I've seen, particularly on these boards when it comes to labeling characters, the labeling is done for the opposite purpose--dismissal, as I mentioned earlier.

As far as Anakin being redeemed through a single act, redemption does not entail a reverse "eye for an eye" in which the number of good deeds done post redemption must equal the number and scope of bad deeds done pre-redemption. Redemption only entails regret for one's actions and a promise (even to oneself) to behave differently post-redemption. Of course Anakin only had 30 seconds or so post-redemption.

Redemption is not earned, it is simply taken by the person who wishes to change.

Whether the people in his life would have chosen to forgive him had he survived the second Death Star, would have been their choice.

Not really. "Whoops - I have this tic in my saber arm, did I get ya?"

That's going too far. As dark side mentor, he would theoretically be of use to an apprentice seeking to unlock the secrets of the dark side. Furthermore, in a sense he does know the secret, given that he knows his master achieved it - he clearly knows the main idea ( midichlorian manipulation ) and knows that it is possible to achieve through exceptional strength in the Force combined with years of practice and experimentation.

He could have been going for a block but missed and hit the hand instead. Furthermore, it was a hasty move of panic, because milliseconds later Mace's saber would land in Sidious' face. In panic reactions, your movements are not as precise as they normally would be, which would, in a sense, qualify as an accident. Finally, a panic reaction is not a well-thought out action. It's an impulse decision.

Yes, but that vague idea Anakin now also knows. Exceptional strength in the Force, midichlorian manipulation, practice. And according to other people I've discussed with in the past days (including yourself, I think...), the Dark Side is really nothing more than using the Force in a selfish, self-serving and possibly hurtful way. That description doesn't seem like different attributes or skill sets at all, just a term to describe in what mindset you're using it. No mentor is needed, Anakin is already a Knight. He just needs to hone his skills to grow in power. Practice makes perfect.