Legacy #16: Claws of the Dragon, part 3 (of 6)

Question out of left field -

Last time we saw Morrigan in issues 9 & 10 (drawn by Wilson, coloured by Anderson), she clearly had blue eyes. This issue (drawn by Duursema, also coloured by Anderson), she's clearly got the same yellowy-green eyes that Cade has - the close-up panel on page...8, I think?

What do people think her real eye-colour is? Wookie lists it as blue, but then it would, since the conflicting source is less than a week old.

Thoughts?

 

I find the bolded statement incredibly amusing, given that you're the one with the expectation that the Jedi should be infallible.

I doubt anyone here is saying Obi-Wan's decisions didn't work out in hindsight (it's always 20/20 you know). Even if some of them ultimately y'know...did. Like say Darth Vader pitching Darth Sidious down a reactor shaft. That's not an intentional byproduct of Obi-Wan's decision to leave him alive on Mustafar, but that's the kind of thing that happens when there's an invisible energy field binding everything together and influencing things along (which is another point you fail to account for in your arguments for the pre-emptive "kill 'em before they get really bad" Jedi).

Where the debate seems to lie is in the fact that Obi-Wan is indeed acting pretty much perfectly in accordance with "the Jedi way", while you criticize him for not acting in accordance with what you think "the Jedi way" should be. As I've noted elsewhere, it's a self-defeating circle: The Jedi are never going to act the way you seem to want them to act (as a whole), yet you cling to this notion that never existed, which appears to lessen your enjoyment of the stories.

In other words, nobody is saying Obi-Wan is perfect. They're just noting that what he's done is perfectly in keeping with his character, and with the themes and plotlines of the very setting we're discussing. If he had killed the nigh-defenseless Hett (for example), then an even more serious error has been committed, as now Obi-Wan is acting out of character.

 

Blue was a coloring mistake. Morrigan's eyes are green like Cade's.

 

I find the bolded statement incredibly amusing, given that you're the one with the expectation that the Jedi should be infallible.

I doubt anyone here is saying Obi-Wan's decisions didn't work out in hindsight (it's always 20/20 you know). Even if some of them ultimately y'know...did. Like say Darth Vader pitching Darth Sidious down a reactor shaft. That's not an intentional byproduct of Obi-Wan's decision to leave him alive on Mustafar, but that's the kind of thing that happens when there's an invisible energy field binding everything together and influencing things along (which is another point you fail to account for in your arguments for the pre-emptive "kill 'em before they get really bad" Jedi).

Where the debate seems to lie is in the fact that Obi-Wan is indeed acting pretty much perfectly in accordance with "the Jedi way", while you criticize him for not acting in accordance with what you think "the Jedi way" should be. As I've noted elsewhere, it's a self-defeating circle: The Jedi are never going to act the way you seem to want them to act (as a whole), yet you cling to this notion that never existed, which appears to lessen your enjoyment of the stories.

In other words, nobody is saying Obi-Wan is perfect. They're just noting that what he's done is perfectly in keeping with his character, and with the themes and plotlines of the very setting we're discussing. If he had killed the nigh-defenseless Hett (for example), then an even more serious error has been committed, as now Obi-Wan is acting out of character.



That is perfectly put. The will of the force finds a way, and it seems to manipulate the world to fullfill destinies. The Jedi way is not to make preemptive strikes, and even if it were, you would have to have one hundred percent certainty that what you were doing was justifiable. Obi-Wan is a servant of the force, and he has a code that he lives by. Unless someone could show him a holo of Krayt some two hundred years in the future, and say... this is what happens if you leave him alive, he has absolutely no way of knowing what leaving Hett alive might cause. So he makes the best decision he can based on the information he has at the time, and at that point, while you could argue that Hett might be redeemable or irredeemable, Obi_wan chose to show compassion and chose to give him a chance to "re-think" his life. How that turns out still remains to be seen. If this is the will of the force, than things might be turning out the way they need to for balance. There is nothing wrong with showing compassion, the fault lies with Hett who threw away the chance given him and kept on the course he knew was wrong. He was a jedi, same as Obi-Wan, and he knew what was right and wrong.

 

First of all I LOVED the issue! It was awesome! I couldn't ask for anything better! The line of the book for me was split between two Cade comments:

1) "So that puts the Skywalkers what? Two up on you, you spiny Murglak!" I love how Cade seems just oblivious to the fact that he is talking to a century plus old extremely powerful Sith Lord. He just doesn't care. Love it!

2) "Want to talk about power Schutta?... Let's talk about mine!" Thats just freaking awesome! I knew I would like Cade and I like him and his attitude more with each issue.

I'm gonna play a little R77 advocate a little bit. I see where he is going with his agruments and opinions and I don't completely disagree. I don't think Obi-wan should have killed Hett necessarily for instace but I do think maybe he should have spent more time with Hett after the battle to feel out his emotions than it appears he did. Of course we don't know much of the story yet so who knows what happened and Obiwan might indeed have checked up on him along the way or something so we'll see. But it seemed very obvious to me and I'm sure to Obi-wan that Hett was absolutely seething in anger when the fight was over. He viewed his life as over and wanted to die. That's a pretty bad emotional state. I guess Obi-wan had confidence in his being a Jedi Master that he could get that stuff under control with meditation and all and I can't really fault him for thinking that. But I do think maybe Obi-wan should have spent a little more time feeling out Hett's emotional state after the fight. Not that it is his fault but I would bet that if he didn't have little Skywalker to look after that he would have put forth more time into it. He might not have but I think maybe he could have and who knows that could have made a huge difference for Obi-wan to assist Hett in some way getting things under control. And if Hett wasn't willing to work on that with him to get his emotions under control, the that would have told Obi-wan something more. And I'm not saying that Obi-wan did anything wrong because he did what a Jedi should do, but he didn't go any extra miles either it seems. I think Obi-wan shouldn't have the responsibility for what Hett became on his shoulders, but he should at least wonder what would have been if he had gone the extra mile for Hett right then.

Another cool thing I saw that might have been brought up but I haven't seen it yet is what Krayt said when talking about Anakin Skywalker to Cade. He seemed to regret not speeking up about Anakin because of what he became saying, "How much blood and pain could have been avoided if I had but spoken?" This is just kind of interesting considering the current discussion of if Obi-Wan should have done something about Hett before he became Krayt. Cool stuff! Just another part of Darth Krayt that isn't your typical Sith Lord. Gotta Love it!

 

Yeah. Obi-Wan could've done something to Hett. But it's cool. I feel Krayt's hurt. And about Cade... Bad Boy+Attitude=HOT!!! Cade is my favorite character in Legacy so far! I even loved him when I first set eyes on him. I like his "Get off my back" and "Don't get on my bad side" kind of style. It's hot! Fangirl says... I love him!!

I also double checked Morrigan's eyes too. And yeah, they were different. So Cade got his eye color from both parents. I kinda like that.

 

Colored contacts?
(when is Retcon Week, anyway? )

 

I have never claimed that the Jedi should be infallible. I just claim that the actions Obi-wan took were not necessarily the best. Most people here argue just the opposite. The basic idea that Obi-wan could have even indirectly caused something bad to happen seems to be too much for them, so that they claim that what he did was the best and he acted like a Jedi should. What he did was how a Jedi might act and how one Jedi did in this case act. Not all the Jedi whe have seen in the movies and EU would have taken the same choices.

Most people here seem to mistake the demands of the plot with correct action. Because the things go as they did in the issue, they think it must have been correct action and be accordance with "the Jedi way". Although one could ask is what Obi-wan does here really in accordance with "the Jedi way", or even with his own character in normal times - how much his actions are not decided by any supposed good Jedi behaviour, but instead his mission to protect Luke? Would every good Jedi really have acted exactly in the same way in these circumstances? Are they all Jedibots, who are programmed with "the Jedi way"?

No, many people here really are saying that Obi-wan is perfect. They, like you, might make few claims that they do not think so, but when one just reads their arguments, that is exactly what they are claiming. In fact, they do not even contemplate the possibility that he could have caused bad things to happen and that he would then possibly bear some responsibility for what happened later. No, denial kicks in and they become irritated that someone could contemplate such thing. So what Obi-wan does because the plot demands that he acts like he does, becomes to them necessarily the only good way to act in that situation.

 

Well I would say that Cade is my favorite character but I don't think we are judging with the same scale. Maybe by your favorite character scale, my favorite would either be 'Sia Fel or Darth Talon. I'll go with Talon... I've always liked twileks and sith chicks... so why not go with a Twilek Sith Chick. Plus she can be vulnerable too "No..." It's the obvious choice.

 

Ah, so that's their color. There are times they look yellow, but I thought that couldn't be it.

 

Talon's a cool character too. By the looks of it, she's totally loyal to her master, along with Wyyrlok. And when it comes to saying something about her master... you don't wanna get on her bad side.
Also, Nihl and Maladi weren't allowed inside on Legacy #15. Nihl couldn't go in because he wasn't born Sith, I understand that. But I don't understand why Maladi couldn't go inside. I maybe wrong but, doesn't Krayt trust her since she was born Sith?

 

Yeah she's a bad girl for sure. I haven't gotten issue 15 yet because my store didn't have it when I went So I haven't seen it all but I don't think it would help my answer on the last part of your post... I have no idea why he wouldn't let her in. You got me.

 

Notwithstanding, this is how Obi-Wan always has acted, so it's not as if it's inconsistent.

No, they're not Jedibots, but they have a strict code that they believe in. Obi-Wan doesn't have to kill Hett - Hett's just a minor diarksider at this point in time. Instead, he injures Hett and makes it impossible for him to return to the Tuskens, where he's been causing the most damage. He neutralizes the current threat, and gives Hett a chance to find his way back to the light. Killing Hett - a man who's pretty much still a Jedi - would be antithetical to the Jedi way. How you can say any different baffles me.

Killing Hett would have been unjustified.

 

I think we have seen great differences in his portrayal during the years; in fact, in his youth, in Melida and Daan Obi-wan did exactly the same thing as Hett, so one would expect him to be more understanding towards him! Hett even probably was not a darksider at this point. What Obi-wan does is not really to give another chance to Hett, but to give his worst "arrogant Jedi Master of the OJO" presentation to Hett after he had won, one of those speeches that seem to be designed to drive to the Dark Side the person who is on the receiving end of it. If Hett had some trust still left towards the Jedi before the fight, Obi-wan probably did succesfully destroy with his action and words what remained.

Why? Why could not Obi-wan justifiably kill him in combat, to take his head off instead of an arm? Surely it is not just that Obi-wan is the superior fighter and it would have been "unfair" because of that - Obi-wan has killed lots of people who had no chance of winning when they went against him. Have all the cases when he has killed people who were not on his level as fighters "unjustified"?

Anyway, killing Hett would have been probably the merciful thing to do. He had lost everything and eventually ended on the Dark Side, a fate which the Jedi think is worse than death. Also, Obi-wan at that point considered the old Jedi Order pretty much gone; what were important were Luke and Leia - or more correctly, mainly Luke, as in the apparently somewhat misogynistic thinking of Yoda and (especially) Obi-wan Leia was just plan B in the case that Luke would fail.

So it is not like Hett or any other surviving Jedi except themselves (and perhaps Qu Rahn with his very limited way) had any role in their plans. I am reminded what Vader says about destroying the Jedi Order in the newest Rebellion issue; in their own way, Yoda and Obi-wan made sure that what remained of the Old Jedi Order was destroyed, so that it would not stand on the way of their new improved version to come. So it is not like Obi-wan or Yoda would have cared if there was one more or less surviving Jedi in the galaxy, as survivors like Hett did not matter in their plans.

 

He let him live and made him swear to stop. Given the severity of his actions - and Luke's life at stake - that's pretty understanding.

Killing farmers doesn't earn you lightside points.

We only see people turn to the dark side after this sort of thing a few times, and that's because those are compelling stories. Otherwise, it seems like sound advice. He offers Hett the chance to leave and start over, but his humiliation of Hett is, one should admit, fairly brutal and decisive. Hett wanted to die after it.

But that's Hett's fault, not Obi-Wan's. Only someone twisted by anger could continue to justify themselves and allow that justification and self-aggrandizement to lead them to even further evil.

Are you forgetting that Jedi don't like killing? That they seek other options, where other options exist? Obi-Wan neutralizes Hett and advises him to rethink his life. He's beaten. There's no reason to kill him.

The Jedi don't do the mercy killing thing. Obi-Wan gave Hett a chance to come back to the light. The fact that Hett turned dark is Hett's bad.

First of all: how can you take something Vader says about the Jedi's ways at face value? Second of all: since when is killing people just because they don't serve any purpose to you part of the Jedi way?

 

Considering what kind of actions the Jedi have forgiven through the years, Hett was just playing in the minor league when Obi-wan defeated him.

But killing farmers does not necessarily earn you darkside points either. In this case it seems that his actions so far had not given Hett darkside points, or he would have already given in to the Dark Side, shown symptoms of it and used Dark Side powers.

Jedi should not like killing, but they are not really adverse to it either. It is not the killing itself, but why, how and in what mood do you do it that matters to them most. Think about Luke and Welk in TJK: Force choking Welk was wrong, killing him with a lightsaber was right, and yet in neither case did Welk had any chance whatsoever, so Luke could as well have incapacitated him and spared his life. Yet he did not do so, and apparently that was not the wrong thing to do. And frankly, the Jedi often kill when they could reasonably spare their opponents. They often fall far from their ideals. Also, many times an apparently defeated opponent, especially a Force user, can be even more dangerous after defeat than before it. They should not just be left to go if they have not accepted the error of their ways and have been redeemed (or, if they have not fully fallen, guided back firmly to the light.)

(I know that Vergere had something to say about the killing thing, but she was just a misguided fallen Jedi according to Lumiya, and her words were poison meant to corrupt Jacen Solo, and so her claims can be left out of this.)

And it also meant the death of who knows how many sentients. Obi-wan made a wrong choice in sparing Hett, but not trying to help him. Giving a chance was wrong, when Hett had nothing to live for, much reason to feel anger and hate, and Obi-wan himself did not plan to help Hett to get back to firm ground.

Leaving the Order 66 survivors to their fate was not really a part of the Jedi way either. Yoda was like a general who after a crushing defeat left his surviving soldiers to fight against impossible odds and went to hiding himself, letting his Jedi followers to be picked one by one by Vader and the Empire. After all, they did not serve any purpose anymore. Obi-wan killing one of them in a fight, without giving in to the Dark Side himself, would hardly have mattered much outside Tatooine itself.

 

They did just that, pre-emptive strikes against Corellia, in Betrayal. Centerpoint part of the mission was justifiable, I think, but the kidnapping part hardly was.

 

They did just that, pre-emptive strikes against Corellia, in Betrayal. Centerpoint part of the mission was justifiable, I think, but the kidnapping part hardly was.



I won't argue with you on that, and you are right they did. I guess I just can't compare the new jedi to the jedi of old. They seem to me to make completely different decisions.

 

That's the New Jedi Order, which isn't quite the same thing. While they're both Jedi, Luke's order is different. While they're mostly the same, Luke is willing to act earlier at times, or be more pre-emptive, especially when there's something like Centerpoint Station involved. And that's not really relevant to the current arguement. And it was justifiable. Corellia was pretty much taking GA money and resources and using them to build secret invasion fleets. The main problem was proving it in a court of law, but Corellia was and still is guilty and everybody knew it. Well, except the people of the galaxy, but they've been established as incredibly stupid for a long, long time. Everybody important knew it at least. In that instance, it was mainly to avoid setting off yet another galactic war, and Luke and company would've suceeded if it weren't for Lumiya interfering everywhere.

And how could Obi-wan kill Hett at that point? It is not Obi-wan's fault that Hett fell. Hett fell because of his own flaws. The Jedi Order helped to compensate for them, even Anakin sorta helped with how they were both from Tatooine, though Hett probably remembers Tatooine far more fondly than Anakin ever did. You might as well blame this whole thing on Palpatine for Order 66 which led to so much death and trauma and left the survivors really messed up. Look at Das Jennir in Dark Times, he's still trying to help in his own way, but he knows he's falling but he just can't do much about it, given his current circumstances. And yes, Jennir was leading a local insurrection, but that was againt the Empire's forces, who are definitely an outside force. The Tatooine farmer/settler vs. Tuskan thing has been ongoing for years, with lots of crimes on both sides. Still though, things are sorta stable, as there aren't mass amounts of Tuskans or farmers dying at the moment. If Hett had stayed war leader of the Tuskans though, then large numbers of farmers would've started dying.

Some Jedi semi-fall, then get slapped down hard by a Jedi Master, and are either taken prisoner, or are given a chance to medidate and try to redeem themselves. Raynar is an example, Luke took him down, and now Raynar's recuperating.

And on the Force choke thing- its mainly the intent that makes it whether its darkside or lightside really. But still, strangling someone is definitely dark. Lightsabers on the other hand can be lethal, but its also possibly to simply use lightsabers to maim someone, leaving them alive. Strangling is less verstaile, that's just outright killing.

And Jedi aren't perfect, but Obi-wan was one of the more idealistic Jedi. It was not wrong to kill Hett. Obi-wan is not omniscient. Hett wasn't that far gone at that point. Obi-wan gave him a chance to stop falling and left it at that. No one can make someone fall or redeem them unless they, or a part of themselves, want to fall or be redeemed. True, outside forces influence the individual a lot, but it still comes down to choice. Leaving Hett alive was a minor risk, especially as that point, as they were all on the run from the Empire. I don't remember if Hett and Obi-wan ever associated that closely, but they were still once fellow Jedi, so Obi-wan can't just kill an old comrade like that. That isn't the Jedi way. True, Obi-wan and Yoda had to make compromises, like hiding out for the next few decades, but they were thinking about the fate of the galaxy. Otherwise, Palpatine would've probably just ruled the galaxy for near forever. Its not so much that the needs of the many outweight the needs of the few or the one, but even if Obi-wan and Yoda probably couldn't easily find other Jedi survivors, and also, in these times, its better for the Jedi to hide seperately. Look at the Purge comic! A dozen or more Jedi in one place got slaughtered. Palpatine had simply stacked the situation too much in his favor, so Obi-wan and Yoda simply had to wait and plan for tomorrow.

Neither of them are perfect, but still, I don't think Obi-wan's decision to spare someone who still

 

Um...precisely! He didn't kill him. He gave him another chance.

Well, I'd say he had a fairly dark side mentality. At least...not a Jedi one.

Often, people have to work stuff out on their own. For every A'sharad Hett I'm sure there are a bunch of other Jedi that realize the error of their ways once they meditate on the teachings they've spent their whole lives with.

Not Obi-Wan's fault.

So...since the Jedi did something unrelated wrong, it's okay for them to do lots of stuff wrong?

 

I think it's obvious that ObiWan's Jedi school counselor is the one to blame for all of this. He should have never advised him to enter into teaching.

 

Is Cade's 'shatterpoint-esque' ability sort of like Vergere's "making herself small" technique?

 

No, it doesn't sound like it.

 

Is there a good description of it somewhere?

 

Awesome, I love that yellowy-pastel-green colour. Thanks for the clarification!