Saga The Origins of Luke's father - Annikin Starkiller, Anakin Skywalker, or Darth Vader?

Or...how about this:

per Samuel Vimes

Both Anakin and Darth go to the Dark Side. However, it is Vader, rather than Skywalker, who is killed. Anakin then secretly assumes the identity of Darth Vader, but Obi-Wan, Yoda, The Emperor, and pretty much everyone else, assumes that it was Darth who survived, and Anakin who was killed. I believe an issue of Fangora magazine from 1981 that stated as much; the author's alternate speculation was that Vader was merely a clone of Luke's father (and that the Emperor was a clone of Ben).

That said, I believe that both your scenario and that of Samuel Vimes cohere with that obscure note from The Making of ESB more than any other alternate idea out there.

 

One answer would be that Vader is Ben Kenobi's son, whom Anakin convinced to join the dark side and oppose his father - like Kylo Ren in TFA.

Another might be that Vader was Anakin's brother and Luke's uncle: a Hamlet-and-Claudius scenario. In this case, the two brothers turned to the Dark Side, and either Ben Kenobi killed one of them or the Emperor struck down one for being insufficently evil.

 

Also Samuel Vimes has a really good suggestion about Vader being a Jedi who originally tried to subvert Palpatine by pretending to join the Dark Side and being sucked in for real. This is basically Luke's arc in the Dark Empire comics, and I'd surmise Lucas did consider it at one time -- drawing on the story of Saruman in Lord of the Rings.

 

In a way, I think that scenario fits the whole "seduced by the Dark Side" line better than what ended up happening. Curiously though, I believe Lucas does use the actual phrase "sucked in" by the Dark Side when discussing what happened to Anakin during the ROTJ story conference.

Jumping back a little, I do rather like the idea of the Emperor pitting Annikin and Vader against each other. My only problem is with The Emperor killing Annikin, instead of Vader being the one who does it. Imo, it needless re-writes what Ben tells Luke in the first film. I can understand some things from the first film being the result of Lucas re-working the story to make it work as a stand-alone, but totally retconning the identity of who actually did the killing of Luke's father, seems to serve what purpose? Perhaps, Lucas was trying to make Vader seem more pathetic/subservient to the Emperor? But why simultaneously 'maximize' Vader's character to that of the #2 evil guy, while also diminishing him in relation to the Emperor, to the point of making Ben lie for no reason?

 

Part II:

The only way to reconcile that story with what Ben said in SW, would be the Ben was duped by the Emperor as well, and Vader is made to be a sort of "scape-goat" for Annikin's death. The Emperor clearly setting up a future conflict between Luke and Vader. The Emperor maybe even "allowing" Ben to live in exile rather than being killed like the other Jedi, perhaps in order to ensure that Luke is in turn deceived/taken in by the Big Lie.

 

In this scenario I doubt Ben was lying per se -- it's more likely that he didn't know about Anakin's fit of conscience, and simply assumed that Vader won the duel between the two of them (which took place behind closed doors).

 

In regards to the above scenario of Anakin refusing to kill Vader in a duel and being killed by the Emperor as a result, it strikes me there likely needs to be a familial reason for Anakin not to kill Vader. Maybe Vader being his younger brother -- and thus playing a Claudius role to Luke's Hamlet.

However, in a scenario where Obi-Wan kills an evil Anakin, IMO the twist of "Obi-Wan killed your father" would be enough, and Vader could be "just Darth Vader," albeit having been turned Dark by Anakin himself.

As for the pre-ESB OT, Vader could be either Luke's older brother or Ben Kenobi's son (ie, the son of Annikin Starkiller's blood brother).

Or, if you wanted to get into more involved scenarios: Vader could be Luke's real father, having seduced Annikin's wife, like Lancelot and Guinevere in Arthurian legend.

Or, Vader could be an evil clone of Annikin created by the Emperor, using DNA taken unwittingly from Annikin by the real Darth Vader, who died in the Battle of Condawn. This idea, where Annikin's clone assumes the identity of the dead Vader who enabled his creation, would later show up in the second draft of TPM, where Obi-Wan Kenobi is the elder Jedi and his apprentice Qui-Gon Jinn takes on Kenobi's name at the end of the film.

If Anakin is the same person as Vader, he doesn't necessarily have to have turned of his own free will. Although this is certainly a possibility, and would result in a Count Dooku-esque storyline of an elder statesman going wrong, like Marechal Petain in WWII. But if Anakin's turn is involuntary, he could be turned either as a result of an evil spell enslaving his mind (like Kyle Katarn in Mysteries of the Sith), or as a result of being killed by the Emperor and resurrected as a zombie (akin to what happens to Starkiller in the dark side ending of The Force Unleashed).

You could also probably apply these latter two ideas to an older brother of Luke equally well. And in these cases, since Vader turned evil against his will, he doesn't necessarily have to die at the end of the OT.

 

This bit, I have talked before about some kind of power that the emperor has, that can turn or in part control others.
In RotJ Vader says he MUST obey his master. Yoda warns Luke to not underestimate the powers of the emperor.
And the whole plan to turn Luke is basically to get him mad and angry enough that he kills in hate.
After that, he will be Palpatine's slave.

But Luke would have no reason to serve Palpatine willingly.
He hates him, both for destroying the rebellion, killing his friends and making him kill his father, whom Luke was trying to save.
If Luke did kill Vader, why would he work for Palaptine? Unlike Anakin, Luke wants nothing from Palpatine except to carve him into bits.
If anything, he would be even more enraged and would attack Palpatine with all he had.
But that apparently was not a worry for Palaptine.
If he can get Luke to kill in hate, he wins and Luke would become his new servant.

To me, the only way this makes sense is if Palpatine, by being so strong in the Dark Side, can bend/twist/corrupt the mind of another Force user that gives in to the Dark side and lets it flow through them.
In essence, he can bend Luke's will until it breaks and Luke submits. And the angrier Luke gets, the quicker he gets defeated.

 

Anakin also hated Palpatine for starting the war and all the suffering that went with it. That's why he drew his saber on him and was struggling with killing him. That's why he told Padme that he could kill him and then they could take over. The fact is that those who crave power will join those who have it, in order to gain it for themselves. Once they've got it, then they will turn on their benefactors.

 

This thread is a really enjoyable read. Good job!

 

Also similar to the concept of the dead Jedi Sifo-Dyas' identity being used by Count Dooku to place the order for the Clone Army.

 

But imagine if Palpatine had turned up when Anakin is holding his dead mother in his arms.
And Palpatine says "I was behind this, I got the Sandpeople to kidnap your mother and torture her to death. It was all me, ha, ha , ha."
Do you think that Anakin would have joined with him or that Anakin would have attacked him?

Also, Luke didn't seem like one who craved power.
Anakin sure, he was power hungry. Both for power and adulation in general but also the specific power to stop death.
So Luke isn't terribly interested in power overall and Palpatine has no specific power that he wants.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

If he only did that and without offering him power, which is why Dooku was the proxy for Anakin's rage. Palpatine himself is fostered for a separate rage that would be required for Anakin to become ambitious enough to want to become so powerful, that he can only destroy him after becoming his Apprentice.

It's power for power's sake. With Anakin, he needed a hook since power for power's sake wasn't enough. He needed an extra push to break through Obi-wan's training and Shmi's upbringing. With Luke, the hook is that Luke isn't fully trained and now he will need to have his training completed and the Sith are the only ones left who can do so. And so this is why he pushes Luke into lashing out at him, and then Vader redirects by turning it around on himself. Luke doesn't seem interested in power, but he's also much more vulnerable than Anakin, due to his age and limited training. The goal is to encourage him to use the dark side and to become addicted to that power.

Anyway, the point is that Lucas wasn't intending for Luke to turn. So while there is potential for it, the outcome is clear. For Vader, there had to be something that would turn him, but also something that would bring him back. Which is why Lucas went down the path of a noble, if completely misguided reasoning for turning.

 

Jumping back a bit:

Once could feasibly combine the two scenarios:

"Vader" - whatever his original name - is Ben's son, who then fathers Luke. And Vader being Ben's son in addition to being Ben's student, would tie in to an earlier idea of Lucas: that Jedi knights taught their own progeny how to become Jedi. Thus, Vader 'naturally' wanted to complete Luke's training, being his father.

 

VADER
Give yourself to the dark side. It is the only way you can save your
friends.

 

I don't see how "it is the only way you can save your friends" proves that Luke craved power for power's sake. (?)

 

As Tosche_Station said, how does this line show that Luke wants power for powers sake?
Anakin was shown to be power hungry, that he enjoyed the powers that the Force gave him.

And note that it is Vader who makes this offer, not Palpatine.
All Palpatine offers Luke is slavery.
That Luke will soon become like his father, a slave to Palpatine.
Luke has seen that Vader is a slave and Vader even admits it. "I MUST obey my Master!"
So Luke knows that if he turns, that is what he can look forward to, being a servant, forced to obey Palpatine.

In ESB, Vader tried to offer a sweet deal to Luke, that they could rule together and end this destructive conflict.
Here he is offering to save Luke's friends if Luke turns.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface.

 

I wonder if Vader being Ben's son could be tied into the general concept that Lucas had at one time - of Jedi teaching their own children? Although usually thought of as being a concept that was in play only in the earliest drafts of Star Wars (#1), what if it was still technically in play when the final movie* was released?

*Only to be finally jettisoned with ESB and the creation of Yoda's character.

 

I never said it meant that, nor did anyone give any indication that's what they were talking about.

Anakin didn't crave power for power's sake. He craved power specifically so that he could accomplish the things he wanted to do, like saving his loved ones from death. Luke faced the same temptation.

 

But he's not being tempted with power. He's being told that he has no choice but to change sides so that his friends don't perish in the battle.

 

I don't think they are quite the same thing.
Luke is given a chance to save his friends by submitting.
That isn't a power as such, it is just a way to save his friends.

Say Vader made the offer of "Kill yourself and your friends will be spared."
Luke again has an option to save his friends but he isn't gaining any power by doing so.

It is like in Indy, last Crusade. The girl is held hostage by some nazi guard and he demands that Indy give up or she'll die. Indy does give up but of course the girl was working for the bad guys all along.
Did Indy gain any power by doing this? Not really.
He was given a choice and he choose to give up in order for a person not to be killed.

Anakin however wants power, he wants power over life and death.
He wants to be able to stop death and he wants to be the most powerful jedi ever.
So to me, he is shown as powerhungry.
He is also shown as someone that likes to show off his powers, to flaunt them, to impress others with them.

Luke has never wanted to be powerful, or be the most powerful ever.
He wants to become a Jedi and save people.
But he also doesn't place himself over others. On Endor, he senses Vader and he gives himself up, both because he hopes that he can reach his father and turn him away from the path he is walking.
But also to protect the mission.
Luke would know that there was serious risk involved, that he could be killed.
But that was a price he was willing to pay.

Bye for now.
The Guarding Dark

 

Anakin craves power primarily as a means to save his loved ones. He's a bit of a show-off too, yes, but that is far from being anywhere close to a driving factor in his quest for greater power. He wants to be the most powerful Jedi ever specifically so he can make things the way he wants them to be. He doesn't crave power for power's sake alone, not until he's already far under the influence of the dark side.

 

Definition of Power Hungry;
Having a strong desire for power.

That describes Anakin quite well in my view.
He views acquiring power as the way to get what he wants.
Save loved ones from dying, make things the way he thinks they should be, power is the answer.
When Shmi died, Anakin didn't consider that he acted too late or things of that sort. What he wanted was power over life and death. To be God essentially.
When he began to have dreams about Padme, his solution was power, more power.
He didn't think to move Padme to a safe location so that she would not get attacked, or have doctors look her over. Nope, nothing could save her except power.

And to me, Anakin was shown as someone that liked having power.
He enjoyed it.
I also think he enjoyed the attention, the adulation.
When not given a rank, he was upset.
He interrupted Padme and reminded her that he was in charge of security.
So not only does he like having power, when not given what he feels is his proper due, he gets upset.

In all, I think he is painted as quite different than Luke.
Luke was given a choice to submit, to become a slave and his friends would be spared.
Anakin was given a vague promise of power and leaped at it.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

Hope everyone had a nice holiday:


I brought up before how in the "revised" second draft (by Lucas) - which was actually the type-written version of the second draft (which was written by hand), but with some additional changes: one, the omission of the "I am your father" dialogue, and two, instead of Yoda having been said to have taught both Ben and Luke's father, now he is said to have taught only Ben, who in turn taught Luke's father.

I had wondered whether that last bit was reflecting yet another change in the Father Vader storyline. Did this indicate (as I used to think) that Lucas was already thinking of making Annikin/Anakin the same person as Vader? Or did it merely indicate that he was considering having Ben teach TWO students - Vader (whoever he was originally) AND Skywalker Sr? One of the Marvel Comics issues contained a 'flash-back' story that suggested the last scenario. What's even more interesting to me, is that in the subsequent drafts written by Lawrence Kasdan (the third, fourth, and fifth - and "final" - drafts), the whole topic of who-taught-Luke's father is completely dropped from the story - was Lucas needing more time to think about things, I wonder?

Thoughts?

 

Bumping:

It's been a while,

I've been thinking over the family dynamics/relationship between the Skywalker/Kenobi/Lars families. What and how were they related? Is it possible that they were one large extended family? What if the Skywalker surname originated as an epithet within 'recent historical' times (in terms of in-universe SW)?