PT Did the prequels ruin the Jedis ?

...You're welcome...I guess???

Just engaging in discussion here. Part of the topic of this thread as you know, is whether the Jedi were shown as more (the word had been used) "heartless" in the PT. My post was not meant to educate-it was simply to express my reasoning for why I don't believe this to be true-at least not in that particular sense.

 

YOU haven't been the one making my brain do cartwheels.

THAT is actually a great comparison to the Anakin scene we all keep talking about. Can I ask a question? Do you find it odd that Yoda would, when faced with galactic spanning consequences, break everything down to brass tacks for Luke in an attempt to get him to stay and complete his training as the last Jedi Knight? And do you find it odd that Yoda would take near that same attitude toward Anakin even though the circumstances are completely different?

 

It's kind of a "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or one" type of thinking.

 

Okay I'm sorry-I thought you were being sarcastic. My bad.

Re: Yoda, I guess I don't find it odd, as IMO it just shows Yoda as unwavering as a Jedi master in each situation, rather than bending his principles and how he interprets the nature of the Force based on each situation.

 

Thank you for being honest about your opinions. Now I know where you stand and can have an honest discussion. I always understood the situation of Yoda's tone and message when Luke was leaving Dagobah. To me, it makes the Jedi seem off-putting that they just always seem to be in that frame of mind. Like, how can you be in tune with life and the force if you're denying yourself to feel? Now, training yourself to have to put duty above personal interest is one thing, but disavowing personal interests at all just seems cold. That is why I feel the Jedi weren't presented well in the PT. Lucas took characteristics of two old men (Obi-Wan and Yoda) in a harrowing situation and gave those characteristics to an entire Order of warrior monks and it does not sit well with me.

 

Now THIS I agree with. I've always felt that too. It's like he used simply Obi-Wan and Yoda as defining examples of how all Jedi should be. I myself agree that there are certain instances in the PT where they come off cold. Mace Windu, Obi-Wan, Yoda-even Qui-Gon-all have moments like this. So IMO although the way Jedi were represented hadn't actually changed between trilogies-I feel we simply saw more of it in the PT, which kind of made these hard-to-swallow traits more obvious.

 

And IMHO not just more of it, but those same instances for completely different and off-putting situations.

 

The one thing I have had trouble believing is that any Jedi can perfectly follow the "no-attachment" rule. They won't fall in love, but they seem to feel attached to the Republic and the Order. Not a bad thing by any means, and it doesn't mean the Order is inherently wrong.

 

I think it was a bad thing. If the Jedi regarded other attachments unhealthy, why not regard their own attachment to the Order and the Republic as unhealthy, considering how this attachment led to the Jedi's growing complacency, arrogance and willingness to do anything to maintain it and their connection to the Galactic Senate.

 

I think the scenes of Anakin being alienated from the council kind of came at the expense of the Jedi. The Yoda/Anakin scene in ROTS is for this but it's just a bad look for Yoda considering Anakin is coming to him for help, which does not seem to be something Anakin has done before.

 

I think there's a difference between controlling emotions and denying them. I don't think denying emotions isn't what's promoted.

While I think an issue for Yoda in that situation is him not recognizing the issues Anakin's feelings are building to, I don't see Yoda's advice in purely the concept, purely, of accepting that he can't do anything about it, as poor.

 

I have never gotten the impression from any film that Lucas was saying that the Jedi just go around and remove children from their families. Qui Gon makes a comment to Shmi about Anakin seeing things before they happen, which is a Jedi trait and "had he been born in the Republic we would have identified him early." I read something or watched an interview somewhere that mentioned parents, in the Republic/familiar with the Jedi, who felt their children had something strange going on would take them to the Jedi voluntarily.

 

So we’re to assume parents in the republic just give their kids away if they’re force sensitive?

All the movie says is that they would have identified him early as force sensitive. I’m not sure what to make of this. Are there mandatory blood tests to check midichlorian levels?

 

If parents are given a choice or not is not made super clear. I think the parents are given a choice.
But the children are not as they are taken at far too young an age where they could given any kind of reasonable consent.

As for how they are "identified".
I doubt parents go to the Jedi if they feel "there is something strange with their children".
Children are taken at very young ages, far too young for them to have shown any Force ability.
Plus Luke apparently showed nothing unusual and he was very strong in the Force.
Anakin could do things that "normal" humans could not but he was a Force Demi-God.

For parents to go to Coruscant and have the Jedi look at their kids. That seems very impractial.
What about those that could not afford that. Or didn't see the need?
Qui-Gon was sure that Anakin would have been "identified" if he had been born in the republic.

What makes the most amount of sense is that when a child is born, along with the usual tests and vaccinations, a midi test is done. If the number is high enough, say above 10 000, then a call goes to the Jedi to inform them of a potential Jedi.
They come calling not long after, say a few months, and possibly do more tests and inform the parents that their child is Force-sensitive and ask if they are willing to give up their child.
If no, the Jedi leave. If yes, the parents never see their child again.

I would think that many would say no, that this is their child and they won't just give he/she away.
Some would say yes, either because they can not afford a child or they are so altruistic that them giving their child to the Jedi is fine.

In all cases, the choice is not made by the person that would eventually become a Jedi.
Yes they can choose to leave if they want to but if your whole life has been with the Jedi Order, how easy would it be to turn away from all that and go on your own way?

There are some emotions that Jedi are simply not allowed.
Familial love, all Jedi to be are separated from their parents to ensure that this does not happen.
Romantic love is a no-no as is the desire for a family of your own.
If you want any of that, then you mist leave the Jedi Order.

I have said this before but if romantic love or love for your children is so bad, such a danger for the person involved, such a risk for them turning to the Dark Side. Then how can any Jedi be allowed to leave the Order and marry and have kids?
They don't loose their Force powers just because they leave the Order. Those powers are still there.
And if an ex-Jedi has his/her family killed and explodes in rage and use the Dark side to get revenge.
How does them being an ex-Jedi help in any way?

As for what Yoda said.
The core message is sound, you must accept the fact that people are not immortal, they will die.
You must be prepared to loose people you care about.
However I think he said it an a very cold and uncaring manner. So the lesson was lost because Yoda did not teach it well.

As for the Jedi themselves in the PT.
Flawed I don't mind, that could make them more human and interesting.
But to me, making them rigid, dogmatic and also seemingly cold and uncaring, made them less human and less interesting.
I was not engaged, I did not care much about them.
Obi-Wan is fine in ep II and III and Qui-Gon has some warm scenes with Shmi.
But the rest I could give care much about and so when they died, I was unmoved.

Some of that is the manner in which most of them speak, there are exceptions. Lucas was going for formal, detached and stoic. The problem in my experience that when you do this, the risk is that the character comes across as unemotional rather than someone that is in control of their emotions.
People have compared the PT Jedi to Vulcans. I don't think it is entirely accurate but also, Vulcans have emotions, strong ones at that. They just temper it with logic.
But some actors when playing Vulcans they play as totally unemotional and thus come across as less animate than road-kill. While better actors, such as Mark Lenard, Nimoy and Tim Russ were able to play a reserved character that still had emotions but mostly under control.

I think the PT Jedi could have been served with having more "fire" in them. Have some disagreement within the Order. Dooku and some like him feel the Jedi should not serve an obviously corrupt senate.
Others think that the system can be fixed and they have a better chance of saving it by working with it.

To take another Star Trek example. In early TNG, Roddenberry had decided that all humans were now perfect, no one grieved, even small children got over the death of their parents instantly.
And no conflict between the main characters was allowed. All conflict had to be external.
This, to me, is not a great way to write compelling drama.
And it runs the risk of making the characters seem dull and unengaging.
Which was a problem for me in early TNG. The humans seemed smug and condescending.
Talking down to "lesser" aliens how more "evolved" humanity was and how much better they were.

In closing, I get what Lucas was going for but I think it was not the best idea and the execution was not great.

Bye for now.
Blackboard Monitor

 

My HOT TAKE for the day. Lucas didn't put much thought into it. He was only focused on Anakin going to the dark side and never bothered to focus on any aspects of what the Jedi Order could have been that didn't lead directly to Anakin's downfall. Lucas wanted Anakin to be taken at a young age so he just made that something the Jedi do. Lucas wanted Anakin's relationship Padme to have something to do with his downfall so the Jedi are against relationships. Lucas wanted Padme's death to have something to do with Anakin's fall so the Jedi handwave death away and Palpatine just happens to know the secret to save her. No more thought was put into these things than how they directly related to Anakin.

 

This is my view as well, the Jedi being too attached to the Republic weakens them. Anytime a mystical or religious group like the Jedi jouns a political faction they become corrupt.

 

Qui-Gon doesn't just take Anakin from Shmi. Why would the jedi, in general, do that?

What's the difference between that and adoption, or being given to an orphanage?

I think that's an issue of commitment. If you want to stay a member of the jedi order, you follow the rules. What would they do otherwise, kill them in their sleep? Force them to stay on against their will?

I don't think that really, as a whole.

I don't think that's something that can be stated for a fact.

 

I said that I think the parents are given a choice but the films don't make it totally clear.
IF, the Jedi have the legal right to take any Force sensitive child into the order.
Why Qui-Gon did not could be for many reasons;
1. He does not like this rule.
2. He is outside the Republic so he has no legal right to do this.
3. He felt that Anakin was old enough to have a say.
4. He, correctly, realized that simply taking Anakin away from a loving mother would likely damage him.

Most often people are not adopted into organizations, like being adopted into the army and be trained to be a soldier.
These children are trained to be Jedi but it was never their choice.
They can choose to leave but again, they would be leaving the only "family" and "home" they know.
Could they go back to their birth parents? Would they even remember them?

The Jedi have strict rules, any contact between their birth parents or siblings is not allowed. Romantic love is not allowed, romantic relationship is not allowed, having a family is not allowed.
The underlying reason for all this is the same, the risk of turning to the Dark Side.
That is why a Jedi is not allowed these things. Because then the risk of turning is too great.
But that risk would still be there if a Jedi leaves the organization.
They don't loose their Force powers.

So my point is this, saying "No, a Jedi can not marry or have children as then you could abuse your powers or turn to the Dark side." while also saying "Sure ex-Jedi can marry or have kids as now there is no risk of abusing powers or turning evil."
To me these two don't work together.

If the Jedi had some way to neuter someones Force-connection, so that if anyone leaves the Order then do some procedure that reduces their Force power and problem solved.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

Which is exactly why I prefaced it by saying it was my opinion.

It's not just you. A lot of people have issues with how these rules are framed. It seems like the Jedi simply think that once someone leaves the Order, everything will just be hunky-dorey. It even seems to come out of left field to the Jedi that Dooku could be up to no good even AFTER he joins the Separatists.

 

The Jedi do have an ability to cut people off from the Force, its called Force Severance. It is the most powerful power, ironically it strips one of a connection to the Force and subsequently their powers. In Legends Nomi Sunrider cut Ulic Qel Droma permanately off from the Force after his fall to the dark side, in canon Luke Skywalker used Force Severance on himself, “I didn’t see you, you’ve cut yourself off from the Force.” (Rey, The Last Jedi). Unique to canon is the ability to cut oneself off from the Force and restablish a connection.

 

Based on what the movies provided, I don't think we'd have a reason to think Qui-Gon's way of doing things, was out of the ordinary.

It's not the army and they're not soldiers.

I don't see what they'd be able to do otherwise.

 

Qui-Gon was established as something of an outsider, one who has defied the council before.
Anakin was deemed too old by the council so would any of them even bring him along?
That is doubtful.

The Jedi are trained to fight and kill if need be. And they are the only protection the Republic has prior to the clone army. So they can be sent into battle.

If the ability that Kato Sai mentioned is there, then they could neuter the Force connection of any Jedi that wants to leave or is kicked out of the order.

And my problem is the world building aspect of this.
The Jedi have very strict rules about love and families, there to play a part in why Anakin turns to the dark side. But these rules are apparently not a concern for a Jedi that leaves the order.
This makes no in-universe sense.
Saying that having contact with your parents, being in a romantic relationship or having a family, that is such a danger of becoming evil but this danger is non-existent once a Jedi leave the order.
It does not work.

Ex. say that the Jedi have a rule against drinking. That if a Jedi drinks and gets drunk then they could abuse their powers and possibly turn evil. So all Jedi are forbidden to drink.
But ex-Jedi can drink as much as they like and get drunk everyday of the week if they feel like it and there is no danger at all.
This does not add up.

The Jedi are training people to use the Force. This gives them a power that others do not have.
And there is also an inherent danger with this power, the risk of the Dark Side.
That the Jedi would be careful with whom they admit, that makes sense.
But they must also be prepared to deal with those that either fail to use this power responsibly or want to leave. If a Jedi to be does not learn to control their emotions and abuse their power time and again.
The Jedi decide to expel this person from the order. Is that the end of it?
Would they just kick this person out and then not have any concern with what this person might do once out of their sight?

In Babylon 5, any person that is found to have telepathic powers are given a choice, join Psi-Corps, go to prison or take drugs that limit their power. Not very nice to be sure. But the world building is more consistent.

Bye for now.
The Guarding Dark

 

Thank you.

 

I don't get the issue. What else would they be able to do? As we see in ROTJ and I think TESB hints at and/or implies, someone's emotions and attachments can be used to turn them to the dark side. I think it makes sense for the jedi to not be for that happening and have a rule against it.

I'd also suggest that that happening may not be an often enough occurrence for the jedi to be wary of it. And even if it would be, what would the jedi be able to do about it? Force a jedi even if they leave to not have a family? Mind control them to stay if they want to leave? I'm not seeing a lot of options.

 

I think the overall issue of the Jedi is Lucas's understanding of morality/ philosophy/ good and evil/ positivity and negativity. Listening to him explain his beliefs about how the force works; how good and evil works, is like listening to a 10 year old. Lucas keeps things incredibly simplistic, yet these topics cannot be distilled simplistically. We're talking about real heart of humanity stuff. It's the deep topics that the human mind is still trying to figure out and Lucas speaks of these things like they're math problems.

This is a guy who looked at cosmic good and evil and was just like, "Balance it." What does that even mean? How do you "balance" life? How do you balance a cosmic energy field?