Balance of the Force

"If the prophecy hadn?t been known to Qui Gon, would he have gone to such lengths to make sure Anakin was trained? It?s undeniable that the very existence of the prophecy has had a significant influence on the events surrounding what it foretold?"

It is an interesting question. It would depend largely on how much one thinks the characters actions are influence/guided/controlled by the Force.

"What do the screenplays say about this scene? ["A Wager with Watto"]"

I think the film itself makes it clear what Qui Gon is playing with.
"Greed can be a powerful ally"

Actually, what I was referring to was, was Qui-gon sent specifically to influence the die roll, as bad_radio states, or did Qui-gon negatively affect the "will of the Force" by influencing the die roll in his favor. Did he cause a change in the direction of the Prophecy by this act?

"Qui Gon is using Watto?s greed to get him to make the bet, then manipulating the Force to fix the outcome. I don?t know how this can be seen as anything other than meddling with the Dark Side. At the very least, it is interfering with Anakin?s fate."

It would appear that you see this the same way I do.

"The Devil spreads hate, feeding that which is already within. But the Devil isn?t hate itself. On the other hand, many religions preach the message that God is love."

Nice.

 

Sorry dude, but you are wrong:

---

The dark side is always there. It is experienced daily by people. It is like a huge cancer, alive, festering?both a reminder of a moral state and, at the same time, symptom and symbol of a very sick society.

? George Lucas, [i]The Power of Myth[/i], 2001[hr][/blockquote]Sounds like an entity to me?

 

Am I? Such gracious interpretation on your part is hardly "proof". But, at least it's better than your previous omission of context for your earlier quote.

"The dark side is always there. It is experienced daily by people"

Not all people are Force-sensitive, but they do all have feelings. This is how they experience the Dark Side.

"It is like a huge cancer, alive, festering"

"is like", not just "is". This is a simile comparing the current state of the Force to a physical construct.

The third draft, as stated previously, also says otherwise...

"Ben explains the Force to Luke: "It is an energy field in oneself, a power that controls one's acts yet obeys one's commands. It is nothing, yet it makes marvels appear before your very eyes. All living things generate this Force field..."

From the novelization and film...

"And well you shouldn't," the Jedi Master advised. "For my ally is the Force. And a powerful ally it is. Life creates it and make it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings we are, not this crude matter," he said as he pinched Luke's skin.
Yoda made a grand sweeping gesture to indicate the vastness of the universe about him. "Feel it you must. Feel the flow. Feel the Force around you. Here," he said, as he pointed, "between you and me and that tree and that rock."

From the Bill Moyers interview...

MOYERS: You said you put the Force into Star Wars because you wanted us to think on these things. Some people have traced the notion of the Force to Eastern views of God-particularly Buddhist--as a vast reservoir of energy that is the ground of all of our being. Was that conscious?

LUCAS: I guess it's more specific in Buddhism, but it is a notion that's been around before that. When I wrote the first Star Wars, I had to come up with a whole cosmology: What do people believe in? I had to do something that was relevant, something that imitated a belief system that has been around for thousands of years, and that most people on the planet, one way or another, have some kind of connection to. I didn't want to invent a religion. I wanted to try to explain in a different way the religions that have already existed. I wanted to express it all.

Therefore, no, I am not wrong, dude.

 

>>>> Not all people are Force-sensitive, but they do all have feelings. This is how they experience the Dark Side.

I thought you said the dark side is ?intent of the user?? But forget about that for a moment? What is the origin/nature of feelings? In the SW universe they are a manifestation of the Force:

---

Briefly formulated, the universal doctrine teaches that all the visible structures of the world?all things and beings?are the effects of a ubiquitous power out of which they rise, which supports and fills them during the period of their manifestation, and back into which they must ultimately dissolve. This is the power known to science as energy, to the Melanesians as [i]mana[/i], to the Sioux Indians as [i]wakonda[/i], the Hindus as [i]shakti[/i], and the Christians as the power of God. Its manifestation in the psyche is termed, by the psychoanalysts, [i]libido[/i]. And its manifestation in the cosmos is the structure and flux of the universe itself.

The apprehension of the source of this undifferentiated yet everywhere particularized substratum of being is rendered frustrate be the very organs through which the apprehension must be accomplished. The forms of sensibility and the categories of human thought, [b]which are themselves manifestations of this power[/b], so confine the mind that it is normally impossible not only to see, but even conceive, beyond the colorful, fluid, infinitely various and bewildering phenomenal spectacle. The function of ritual and myth is to make possible, and then facilitate, the jump?by analogy.

? Joseph Campbell, [i]The Hero with a Thousand Faces[/i][hr][/blockquote]And moreover, some feelings are manifestations of the dark side of the Force:

[blockquote][hr][b]YODA:[/b] Anger? fear? aggression. The dark side of the Force are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight.

? From [i]The Empire Strikes Back[/i] screenplay[hr][/blockquote]

EDIT: I forgot to mention that all life forms have midi-chlorians, so to some extent everyone is Force sensitive in the [i]SW[/i] universe.

 

>>>> Which is all well and good, but overlooks the fact that no belief system that I know of depicts them as two truly opposite forces. God is always the one God (analogous to one Force), while the Devil is the fallen angel, cast out of heaven and into hell (which is usually defined as the absence of God?s presence- just as going to the Dark Side can be described as ?stepping out? of the Force?s destiny.)

---

The earliest prophet of this mythology of cosmic restoration was, apparently, the Persian Zoraster, whose dates, however, have not been securely established. They have been variously placed between c. 1200 and c. 550 B.C., so that, like Homer (of about the same span of years), he should perhaps be regarded rather as symbolic of a tradition than as specifically, or solely, one man. The system associated with his name is based on the idea of a conflict between the wise lord, Ahura Mazda, ?first father of the Righteous Order, who gave to the sun and stars their path,? [b]and an independent evil principle , Angra Mainyu, the Deceiver, principle of the lie, who, when all had bee excellently made, entered into it in every particle.[/b]

? Joseph Campbell, [i]The Masks of God: Oriental Mythology[/i][hr]
[hr]In mythology, wherever the Unmoved Mover, the Mighty Living One, holds the center of attention, there is a miraculous spontaneity about the shaping of the universe. The elements condense and move into play of their own accord, or at the Creator?s slightest word; the portions of the self-scattering cosmic egg go to their stations without aid. But when the perspective shifts, to focus on living beings, when the panorama of space and nature is faced from the standpoint of the personages ordained to inhabit it, then a sudden transformation overshadows the cosmic scene. No longer do the forms of the world appear to move in the patterns of a living growing, harmonious thing, but stand recalcitrant, or at best inert. The props of the universal stage have to be adjusted, even beaten into shape. The earth brings forth thorns and thistles, man eats bread in the sweat of his brow. [?]

Herein lies the paradox of myth: the paradox of the dual focus. Just as at the opening of the cosmogonic cycle it was possible to say ?God is not involved, ? but at the same time ?God is [b]creator-preserver-destroyer[/b],? so now at this critical juncture where the One breaks into the many, destiny ?happens,? but at the same time ?is brought about.? From the perspective of the source, the world is a majestic harmony of forms pouring into being, exploding, and dissolving. But what the swiftly passing creatures experience is a terrible cacophony of battle cries and pain. The myths do not deny this agony (the crucifixion); they reveal within, behind, and around it essential peace (the heavenly rose).

The shift of perspective from the repose of the central Cause to the turbulation of the peripheral effects is represented in the Fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. They ate of the forbidden fruit, ?And the eyes of them both were opened.? The bliss of Paradise was closed to them and they beheld the created field from the other side of a transforming veil. Henceforth they should experience the inevitable as the hard to gain.

? Joseph Campbell, [i]The Hero with a Thousand Faces[/i][hr][/blockquote]

 

>>>> Actually, what I was referring to was, was Qui-gon sent specifically to influence the die roll, as bad_radio states, or did Qui-gon negatively affect the "will of the Force" by influencing the die roll in his favor. Did he cause a change in the direction of the Prophecy by this act?

Actually, up until TPM?s shooting script, there was no die at all. When Qui-Gon negotiates for both Anakin and Shmi in exchange for Anakin?s pod racer, Watto simply says that Shmi is not for sale. Apparently, it was George?s intent that it was the will of the Force for Anakin, and just Anakin, to go with Qui-Gon.

 

"I thought you said the dark side is "intent of the user"?"

But I never said it couldn't affect them. ? The Dark Side can be "sensed".

BTW..

"The forms of sensibility and the categories of human thought, which are themselves manifestations of this power"

I suppose, then, that you are going to tell me that "thoughts" are entities as well?

"The function of ritual and myth is to make possible, and then facilitate, the jump-by analogy."

Meaning it's a simile/metaphor, and not referring specifically to the concept itself. Again, sounds pretty ethereal to me.

"And moreover, some feeling are manifestations of the dark side of the Force:

YODA: Anger, fear, aggression. The dark side of the Force are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight."

And as I pointed out above, feelings are not "entities". As was pointed out in your above quote, these are analogies. Besides, not everything Yoda told Luke was the truth, such as his statement..

Yoda "If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consumer you it will, as it did Obi-wan's apprentice."

Luke ends up not being "consumed", despite his clear use of the Dark Side against Vader. Similary, Yoda continues to withhold information about Anakin being Luke's father.

Then there's the famous...

Luke - "Is the Dark Side stronger?"

Yoda - "No...no...no. Quicker, easier, more destructive."

Clearly, this is Yoda's point of view, which goes against that of Lucas', who stated that the Dark Side is stronger. In addition to thinking that the characters know everything the writer knows (which they do not), you keep forgetting that the Force, like many other concepts, continued to evolve into what was eventually seen in the films, which, BTW, did not contain the line "Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight."

Indeed, Yoda simply said, "Anger, fear, aggression, the dark side are they.", once again, referring to emotions, not entities or manifestations.

Even Palpatine said, "Give in to your hatred", not "the hatred of the Dark Side".

You really need to upgrade your views.

"EDIT: I forgot to mention that all life forms have midi-chlorians, so to some extent everyone is Force sensitive in the SW universe."

Well, I'll concede this point to you. What I meant was that not all people are conciously aware of the Force, or equally sensitive to it. This is what separates most people from Jedi. Nonetheless, I made it clear that I believe all people are still affected by the Dark Side.

"Angra Mainyu, the Deceiver, principle of the lie, who, when all had bee excellently made, entered into it in every particle." - Joseph Campbell

This assumes, of course, that Lucas used everything that Campbell wrote, which he did not. Similarly, Lucas stated "I didn't want to invent a religion. I wanted to try to explain in a different way the religions that have already existed. I wanted to express it all." Clearly, Lucas' intent was to come up with his own reasoning, not simply copy Campbell's, as your post implies.

"In mythology, wherever the Unmoved Mover, the Mighty Living One, holds the center of attention......

Yada, yada, yada. Again, this is not proof. Campbell, like other sources Lucas read, was an influence. He did not copy the man verbatim. Get off Campbell, and let's get back to Lucas already. Sheesh.

"Actually, up until TPM?s shooting script, there was no die at all."

Yet, in the film, there is. You seem to keep forgetting the films. ?

"Apparently, it was George?s intent that it was the will of the Force for Anakin, and just Anakin, to go with Qui-Gon."

Was it? Any proof other than your interpretation?

3 consecutive posts? You're a busy boy. Seems catching you in a lie lit a fire under your ass.

 

>>>> I suppose, then, that you are going to tell me that "thoughts" are entities as well?

I thought I said they were manifestations of the Force (the entity).

>>>> Yoda - "No...no...no. Quicker, easier, more destructive."

FYI, it?s ?No? no? no. Quicker easier more seductive.?

>>>> BTW, did not contain the line "Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight."

I think you should go dust off your coveted LDs. Watch the movie again.

>>>> Yada, yada, yada. Again, this is not proof. Campbell, like other sources Lucas read, was an influence. He did not copy the man verbatim. Get off Campbell, and let's get back to Lucas already. Sheesh.

Like I didn?t see that coming from a mile away.

>>>> Seems catching you in a lie lit a fire under your ass.

What are you talking about? What lie?

 

>>>> The third draft, as stated previously, also says otherwise...

Here?s the entire excerpt from the third draft:

---

[b]BEN:[/b] You were right. It is my responsibility. The Force of Others brought the message to you and then it brought you to me.
[b]LUKE:[/b] My father used to talk about the Force of Others. But he never told me what it was?
[b]BEN:[/b] Let's just say the Force is something a Jedi Warrior deals with. It is an energy field in oneself, a power that controls ones acts, yet obeys ones commands. It is nothing, yet it makes marvels appear before your very eyes. All living things generate this Force field, even you.
[b]LUKE:[/b] You mean I generate an energy field?
[b]BEN:[/b] It surrounds you and radiates from you. A Jedi can feel it flowing from him? (patting at his stomach) ?from here!
[b]LUKE:[/b] Could I learn to feel it?
[b]BEN:[/b] That is not a human decision, not yours or mine.

? From the third draft of [i]A New Hope[/i]?s screenplay[hr][/blockquote][b]?That is not a human decision, not yours or mine.?[/b]

Doesn?t sound like intent to me?

But wait there?s more:

[blockquote][hr][b]LUKE:[/b] Do the Sith know the ways of the Force?
[b]BEN:[/b] They use the Bogan Force.
[b]LUKE:[/b] Like Bogan weather, or bogan times. I thought that was just a saying.
[b]BEN:[/b] There are two halves of the Force of Others. One is positive and will help you if you learn how to use it. But the other half will kill you if you aren't careful. This negative side of the Force is called the Bogan, which is where the expression came from, and it is the part that is used by the Dark Lords to destroy their opponents. Both halves are always present. The Force is on your right, the Bogan is on your left. The Kiber Crystal can amplify either one. The Crystal Darth stole was the last one in the possession of the Jedi. When he joined the Sith, the power of the Dark Lords was completed.

? From the third draft of [i]A New Hope[/i]?s screenplay[hr][/blockquote]And later:

[blockquote][hr][b]VADER:[/b] Something old has been awakened. The Force has suddenly grown stronger. We must travel future paths with caution.

? From the third draft of [i]A New Hope[/i]?s screenplay[hr][/blockquote]One side of the Force growing stronger?! But how can that be?!

 

"I thought I said they were manifestations of the Force (the entity)."

Actually, you didn't say anything. As usual, you let your quotes do your talking, and it bit you in the ass this time.

"The forms of sensibility and the categories of human thought, which are themselves manifestations of this power"

This statement says that human thought and "manifestations of this power" are one and the same. Since you think the Force is an entity, then by the reasoning of your quote, thoughts must be an entity as well.

You might want to raed your quotes before advancing them as "proof".

"Yoda - "No...no...no. Quicker, easier, more destructive."

FYI, it?s "No..no..no..Quicker easier more seductive."

Well, I guess if you have to take points where you can get them...

"BTW, did not contain the line "Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight."

"I think you should go dust off your coveted LDs. Watch the movie again."

Guess what? I just did it (I love LD's). YODA NEVER SAYS THIS!!!

You are so convinced of your own opinion, that you are making up scenes from the movie in your head to make your case. As I said before, you tend to keep forgetting what's in the films, themselves. Please stop embarassing yourself like this.

Tell you what...you go back and watch the films, and tell me I'm wrong.

"Yada, yada, yada. Again, this is not proof. Campbell, like other sources Lucas read, was an influence. He did not copy the man verbatim. Get off Campbell, and let's get back to Lucas already. Sheesh."

"Like I didn?t see that coming from a mile away."

Yet you still posted faulty reasoning? Am I supposed to give you some sort of handicap, like golf? Post proof, or don't post at all. What a waste of time.

"What are you talking about? What lie?"

I'm sorry, that must have been bad_force_manifestation_radio that posted..Bluff called- They?re two separate quotes on the subject of the Force, hence the new paragraph and the new set of quotations.

Deliberate misrepresentation of the context of your quote in order to support your interpretation, which in itself would seem to say a lot about your interpretation to begin with.

Then again, maybe this was just one of those "certain point of view" things?

"That is not a human decision, not yours or mine."

"Doesn't sound like intent to me"

Doesn't sound like dialogue from the film to me. GET OFF OF THE OUTDATED CONCEPTS! The Annotated screenplays talk endless of the evolution of several concepts, in case you forgot. Pretty soon, you'll be referring to Luke as "Starkiller".

"LUKE: Do the Sith know the ways of the Force?"
BEN: They use the Bogan Force."

Sorry, I'm stopping there. Your desperation is clearly showing. THE BOGAN FORCE DOES NOT EXIST IN THAT CAPACITY ANYMORE!

"VADER: Something old has been awakened. The Force has suddenly grown stronger. We must travel future paths with caution."

"One side of the Force growing stronger?! But how can that be?!"

Puhleeze! Quit making stuff up. Vader doesn't refer to "one side", simply the Force itself, which supports my assertion! Even Palps says "there is a great disturbance in the Force", not the Light or the Dark Side. When Alderaan was destroyed, Obi-wan also referred to a "disturbance in the Force", with no mention of which side. Obviously, this distinction isn't important in the films.

While you are welcome to interpret these statements to suit your own needs, they are only your interpretations, and not facts or proof in any way, shape, form, or manifestation.

You really need to rethink your gameplan before continuing this line of reasoning. I'm going to bed now, so please, take all the time you need (and dust off those VHS tapes while you're at it. )

 

*double-post*

Must've been the Dark Side entity typing for me.

 

>>>> Actually, you didn't say anything. As usual, you let your quotes do your talking, and it bit you in the ass this time.

I thought I said: ?What is the origin/nature of feelings? In the SW universe they are a manifestation of the Force?

>>>> You are so convinced of your own opinion, that you are making up scenes from the movie in your head to make your case. As I said before, you tend to keep forgetting what's in the films, themselves. Please stop embarassing yourself like this. Tell you what...you go back and watch the films, and tell me I'm wrong.

You are wrong. Will someone please vouch for me on this? Listen carefully to that scene where Luke is carrying Yoda on his back. And as Luke is walking through the trees Yoda clearly says:

---

[b]YODA:[/b] Run! Yes. A Jedi?s strength flows from the Force. But beware of the dark side. Anger? fear? aggression. The dark side of the Force are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will, as it did Obi-Wan?s apprentice.[hr][/blockquote]Dude you are going to kick yourself in the morning. This seems to be a case of you hearing only what you want to hear. Sorry, but it is you who are emba[b]r[/b]rassing yourself. I am not a liar. Watch the film.

>>>>[b][i] I'm sorry, that must have been bad_force_manifestation_radio that posted..Bluff called- They?re two separate quotes on the subject of the Force, hence the new paragraph and the new set of quotations. Deliberate misrepresentation of the context of your quote in order to support your interpretation, which in itself would seem to say a lot about your interpretation to begin with.[/i][/b]

I was calling [i]your[/i] bluff, brainiac. They are two separate quotes, one quote having little to do with the other. Read the book. Anytime someone in that book is quoted twice in a row, their quotes are separated into different paragraphs and new quotations marks are used. FI?

>>>>[b][i] Doesn't sound like dialogue from the film to me. GET OFF OF THE OUTDATED CONCEPTS! The Annotated screenplays talk endless of the evolution of several concepts, in case you forgot. Pretty soon, you'll be referring to Luke as "Starkiller".[/i][/b]

You were the one using that screenplay as the basis for your argument, not me.

>>>>[b][i] Puhleeze! Quit making stuff up. Vader doesn't refer to "one side", simply the Force itself, which supports my assertion![/i][/b]

You really need to read that script. Every time anyone refers to the good side of the Force they simply say ?the Force.? However, when anyone mentions the bad side of the Force they refer to it as ?the Bogan.? Contrast with what Mace says in [i]AOTC[/i]?s screenplay:

[blockquote][hr][b]MACE:[/b] The prophecy is coming true, [b]the dark side is growing.[/b]
[b]YODA:[/b] And only those who have turned to the dark side can sense the possibilities of the future. Only going through the dark side can we see.

? From [i]Attack of the Clone[/i]?s screenplay[hr][/blockquote]

 

"The midi-chlorians have brought Anakin into being as "the Chosen One" who brings balance to the universe. The mystery around that theory is that we don't yet know whether the chosen one is a good or a bad person. He is to bring balance to the Force; but at this point, we don't know what side of the Force needs to be balanced out."

The truth is Lucas was refering to the audience. Just like when he said "We don't know if Dooku is a good guy or a bad guy." Then at the end of the movie, Lucas lets us know that he is a bad guy. Same thing in this quote.

Here is the quote to clear this up.

"Which brings us to films 4, 5 and 6, where Anakin's offspring redeem him and allow him to fulfill the prophecy where he brings balance to the Force by doing away with the Sith and getting rid of evil in the universe."
--George Lucas

 

Will someone please vouch for me on this?

Bad Radio, its the best I could do but this is from the Annotated Screenplays:

Yoda: Run! Yes. A Jedi's strength flows from the Force. But beware the dark side. Anger...fear...aggression. The dark side of the Force are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will, as it did Obi-Wan's apprentice.

Luke: Vader. Is the dark side stronger?

Yoda: No...no...no. Quicker, easier, more seductive.

From "Star Wars: The Annotated Screenplays", page 180

 

I hate to kick a man when he?s down, but just so you don?t start calling everyone else a liar when they start chiming in to say you are wrong, MBJ, here is an MP3 taken from the Definitive Edition Empire LD: the dark side

 

bad radio

The dark side is always there. It is experienced daily by people. It is like a huge cancer, alive, festering?both a reminder of a moral state and, at the same time, symptom and symbol of a very sick society.

>>>>Sounds like an entity to me?

How so? Exactly the same description could apply to hate or anger or fear (or indigestion!)- always there, experienced daily by people etc. etc. but they certainly aren?t entities in themselves.

And are you saying that you would call a cancer a distinct entity to the host? It seems to me that Lucas? repeated references to the ?cancer? analogy for the Dark Side (as opposed to, say, a parasitic relationship which in many ways is similar, except the parasite is a distinct entity, and I believe Lucas has used in reference to the Sith) is saying that this is something he hasn?t just come up with off the top of his head, and it certainly seems to me to be in fitting with the Dark Side of the films.

Look at how a cancer develops;
A cancer starts off with a mutation of a single normal, healthy cell, which then continues to live, grow, and replicate. However, cancerous cells do not die off in the way that normal cells die off, with the result that as they replicate and grow, a tumourous growth develops. Because the cancerous cells are actually ?flawed? host cells, the body?s immune system can do nothing to arrest their growth, as it simply sees that they aren?t foreign cells, and therefore doesn?t recognise them as a threat (?hard to see??) The cancer then continues to grow, creating a strain on the ?hosts? blood supply (at a faster rate than normal cells), starts to create physical problems as the tumor gets larger (ie. restricting circulation if it?s near arteries, causing pressure on vital organs etc.) In taking up a disproportionately large strain on the body?s resources, it damages the crucial balance within the body and in it?s own struggle to survive, kills the host and with it, itself. The very fact that they are so good at survival, their refusal to die off at a ?healthy? rate is the root behind what makes them so dangerous (which is clearly echoed in Anakin?s character- ?I will learn to stop death? compared to, for example, Yoda- ?that is the way of things, the way of the Force.?)

The cancer isn?t a distinct, independent entity to the host- if it were then cancer would be much less dangerous and easier to deal with (both preventatively as well as therapeutically), instead of having to attack with relatively clumsy and dangerous techniques which do as much damage to the healthy surrounding area as to the cancer itself.


>>> The system associated with his name is based on the idea of a conflict between the wise lord, Ahura Mazda, ?first father of the Righteous Order, who gave to the sun and stars their path,? and an independent evil principle , Angra Mainyu, the Deceiver, principle of the lie, who, when all had bee excellently made, entered into it in every particle.

Good counter-example, but this still doesn?t illustrate the concept of evil being a single, independent entity opposite to God- specifically stating that it enters into every particle rather than having the power of creation himself- as well as being described as a ?principle? rather than as an entity. And it?s still not the omnipotent god-like entity that you seem to be saying the Dark Side is- it?s clearly a corruption of ?the father?s? creation, rather than an ?opposite? entity/force.

And I don?t understand how your ?Hero of a Thousand Faces? quote backs up the idea of a ?good god/bad god? belief system either, as it doesn?t seem to address the subject of morality in any way. Looking at your emphasis on God as ?creater-preserver-destroyer?, this is simply a natural cycle- as I think the cancer analogy illustrates (and Yoda in ROTJ acknowledges), death (ie. god the destroyer) is a necessary part of the cycle of life.

Anyway, the impression I?m getting from your quotes from early drafts and influences is that it seems that you?re getting the ?Bog

 

"I hate to kick a man when he?s down"

As if

I'm not down, and you've yet to kick anywhere near me.

"I was calling your bluff, brainiac. They are two separate quotes, one quote having little to do with the other."

As are most of your quotes. All your Campbell info was written before the films, yet you try to use it as "proof" after the fact. Throw up all the info you want, but it is not so much support as it is cover. Your attempts to daunt with reams of "seemingly similar" information generally shares but a few key words. It is circumstantial at best.

By the way, I had no "bluff". This is the full quote...

"I felt the Kiber Crystal was a way of articulating what was going on, but I decided I didn't need it. It was better to make the Force more ethereal than to have it solidified in a thing like the crystal. "The idea of positive and negative, that they are two sides to an enitity.a push and a pull, a Yin and a Yang, and the struggle between the two sides are issues of nature that I wanted to make in the film. Obiviously, in terms of moral issues, you always have what's considered moral and immoral. At the same time if you are dealing with the possible influences beyond what we can see, it's traditionally been the good and the bad."

Lucas wants the Force to be ethereal. This did not change in the films. Case settled.

"Doesn't sound like dialogue from the film to me. GET OFF OF THE OUTDATED CONCEPTS! The Annotated screenplays talk endless of the evolution of several concepts, in case you forgot. Pretty soon, you'll be referring to Luke as "Starkiller".

"You were the one using that screenplay as the basis for your argument, not me."

Screenplays, like the Campbell text, can be used to show the possible origin or evolution of ideas. Nonetheless, they are trumped by the films.

scott3eyez

"Anyway, the impression I?m getting from your quotes from early drafts and influences is that it seems that you?re getting the ?Bogan Force? and the ?Dark Side of the Force? confused. The two are clearly related but distinctly different concepts- while the Bogan clearly was a distinct and separate entity, the ?Force? in the films is not the same as the ?Force? from the screenplays, early drafts, novelisations, EU novels etc. etc. Similarly, the Ashla was another distinct entity, with no parallel ?light side? concept appearing in the films, or the ?good on your right, bad on your left? idea. Clearly, ideas have been revised as the drafts progressed (the Force is no longer generated from your stomach to take an obvious example!)"

The whole irony of bad_radio's position is that he is making the same exact mistake that the Jedi and Anakin made - seeing these "sides" of the Force as distinctly different. Anakin was both good and bad in AOTC. He could kill and love. In the OT, he has completely abandoned his "good" side, believing that he is truly evil. Luke comes around and shows him the error of his ways, as he uses both aspects of the Force to redeem Anakin. As such, Anakin is once again able to love (Luke) and hate (Palpatine), and his final act rests on both emotions, not just one or the other.

GL: "Midi-chlorians are a loose depiction of mitochondria, which are necessary components for cells to divide. They probably had something--which will come out someday--to do with the beginnings of life and how one cell decided to become two cells with a little help from this other little creature who came in, without whom life couldn't exist. And it's really a way of saying we have hundreds of little creatures who live on us, and without them, we all would die. There wouldn't be any life. They are necessary for us; we are necessary for them. Using them in the metaphor, saying society is the same way, says we all must get along with each other."

(Not directly related to the Force, but not entirely different. It takes both sides to function. This is what "balance" o

 

truly amazing, well researched and thought out. Great Job

 

Well, bad_radio, it appears I made a mistake.

After turning my volume way up, it would appear that one can almost hear Yoda speak these words. My apologies.

That being said, this is your proof that the Force is an entity?

Am I not correct in reminding you that you, yourself, have stated in other threads that Yoda changes his tune about the nature of the Force between the OT and the PT? (an assertion which I agree with, by the way.)

So here we are, listening to a character who is giving us his interpretation of what the Force is to him, and you are saying Yoda is right? ?

Yoda spoke with the same intensity in the PT, and turns out he was wrong anyways.

Yoda also said the Dark Side wasn't stronger, yet Lucas says otherwise.

There is a clear difference between what Yoda believes, and what Lucas intended.

1) "You must confront Vader" - Well, it wasn't until Luke confronted Palpatine that he truly became a Jedi, and fulfilled the Prophecy.

2) "Consume you, [The Dark Side] will" - Nope. Luke fought it off.

Not to mention the fact that it could be argued that Yoda is intentionally lying to Luke. Hell, Yoda and Obi-wan don't ever appear to believe that Vader can be turned. In spite of this, you take Yoda's muttered words of what he believes the Dark Side to be as your only in-film proof?

Incredible.

Well, here you go. Here is your little victory. Copy it, print it, post it on your wall.

I'll say this much, I'd rather miss one line of mumbled dialogue - which changes nothing in terms of this argument - than the whole intended concept of the Force itself, as it is represented in the films.

You've won this battle, but certainly not the war.

BTW, thanks for correct my misspellings. I was too tired to spellcheck completely. It's fun watching the little psychological games you play in an attempt to diminish your opponent when your argument isn't getting the job done. Again, grab whatever points you feel necessary. My argument stands, nonetheless.

That is, unless, you believe Yoda knows more about the Force than Lucas does...

 

>>>> As are most of your quotes. All your Campbell info was written before the films, yet you try to use it as "proof" after the fact. Throw up all the info you want, but it is not so much support as it is cover. Your attempts to daunt with reams of "seemingly similar" information generally shares but a few key words. It is circumstantial at best.

What?s does it matter that most of Campbell?s books were written before the films? Lucas has acknowledged Campbell as being a big influence on SW:

---

I didn't know what I was doing at the time [when I was writing [i]Star Wars[/i]]. I started working, started doing research, started writing, and a year went by. I wrote many drafts of this work and then I stumbled across [i]The Hero with a Thousand Faces.[/i] It was the first time that I really began to focus. Once I read that book I said to myself, ?This is what I've been doing. This is it.? [?] It was [i]The Hero with a Thousand Faces[/i] that just took what was about 500 pages and said, ?Here is the story. Here's the end; here's the focus; here's the way it's all laid out.? It was all right there and had been there for thousands of years, as Dr. Campbell pointed out. And I said, ?This is it.? [?] It's possible that if I had not run across him I would still be writing Star Wars today.

? George Lucas, quoted in P. Cousineau, [i]The Hero?s Journey: Joseph Campbell on His Life and Work[/i], 1990[hr][/blockquote]>>>>[b][i] By the way, I had no "bluff". This is the full quote...[/i][/b]

No, I?m sorry. Here is the full quote exactly as it appears in the book:

[blockquote][hr][first paragraph]?I felt the Kiber Crystal was a way of articulating what was going on, but I decided that I didn?t need it. It was better to make the Force more ethereal than to have it solidified in a thing like the crystal.

[new paragraph/new quote]?The idea of a positive and negative, that there are two sides to an entity, a push and a pull, a yin and a yang, and the struggle between the two sides are issues of nature that I wanted to include in the film. Obviously, in terms of moral issues, you always have what?s considered moral and what?s considered immoral. At the same time, if you are dealing with possible influences beyond what we can see, it?s traditionally been the good and the bad.?[hr][/blockquote]Compare that with Joe Johnston?s quotes on page 99, where in his first quote talks about Colin Cantwell?s design for the Tie Fighter, and then in his second quote (new paragraph/new quotations) he talks about shooting the scenes for the X-Wings and Tie Fighters. Now turn to page 108, and take a look at Paul Hirsh?s comments. His first quote mentions how Fox wanted to eliminate the battle sequence with the X-Wings invading the Death Star. The following paragraph?a totally different quote, hence the new set of quotation marks?he explains how they used old WWII footage as placeholders for the X-Wing/Tie Fighter dogfights. So when George is talking about the Force in the abovementioned quotes, it?s him referring to what the Force [i]was[/i], and what it is [i]now[/i].

>>>>[b][i] Lucas wants the Force to be ethereal. This did not change in the films. Case settled.[/i][/b]

I was never arguing with you there? The Force is an ethereal (impalpable/invisible), ever-present energy field that influences the destiny of all living things in the [i]SW[/i] universe. And just how does it influence a person?s destiny? Through feelings:

[blockquote][hr]I tried, in my going through mythology, to distill down into certain basic ideas things that seem to exist in a great deal of mythology. Again, to try to find the themes and ideas that continue over a great amount of time and across a wide spectrum of cultures. The Force is a result of that. [b]The Force is the way that many people view the great mysteries of ?Is there other realities at work other than the one we can perceive.?[/b]

? George Lucas, Laserdisc Commentary, [i]Star Wars Trilogy Definitive Collection[/i], 1993[hr]
[hr]Ultimately the Force is the large

 

This again?

George Lucas: "Moving in the area of the Force and the trying to describe it, trying to come up with a name for it, trying to describe this other existence, I didn't want to use God or any of those kinds of connotations. Even though I called it the Force of this and the Force of that in the beginning, I eventually shorthanded it just to the Force."

Interesting that the original concept was "May the Force of others be with you". Again, does this sound like an "entity", when it's comprised of so many others?

"What's does it matter that most of Campbell's books were written before the films? Lucas has acknowledged Campbell as being a big influence on SW:"

To begin with, yes. Over time, no...

The notion of the Force appeared in the rough draft when the king sends a delegation to deal with the New Galactic Empire and says "May the Force of others be with you," an obvious variation on the Christian phrase "May the Lord be with you and with your spirit." But the definition of the powers of the Force was developed in the second draft.

George Lucas: "I read a lot of books about mythology and theories behind mythology; on of the books was The Hero of a Thousand Faces by Joseph Campbell, but there were many others, maybe as many as fifty books. I basically worked out a general theory for the Force, and then played with it. The more detail I went into, the more it detracted from the concept I was trying to put forward. I wanted to take all religions, major religions and primitive religions and come up with something they might have in common. It worked better as I got less specific...So the real essence was to try to deal with the Force but not to be too specific about it."

Lucas' final product is not in line with Campbell's ideas. Again, your sources are outdated by the films, both chronologically and philosophically.

"In sum, trusting your feelings is the way a person perceives that there is something larger and more mysterious at work:"

Interesting, since I stated this before..

"Not all people are Force-sensitive, but they do all have feelings. This is how they experience the Dark Side."

"I thought you said the dark side is ?intent of the user?? But forget about that for a moment? What is the origin/nature of feelings? In the SW universe they are a manifestation of the Force:"

I guess the difference is, you think "good" and "bad" feelings come from the Force, whereas I believe these feelings start in the individual, and are enhanced by the Force. Your belief makes Jedi and Sith "puppets" of the Force, whereas mine makes them "symbionts" with the Force, in line with the thinking of Qui-gon, Yoda and Obi-wan.

GL: "Midi-chlorians are a loose depiction of mitochondria, which are necessary components for cells to divide. They probably had something--which will come out someday--to do with the beginnings of life and how one cell decided to become two cells with a little help from this other little creature who came in, without whom life couldn't exist. And it's really a way of saying we have hundreds of little creatures who live on us, and without them, we all would die. There wouldn't be any life. They are necessary for us; we are necessary for them. Using them in the metaphor, saying society is the same way, says we all must get along with each other

"Oh man, if you are trying to argue that the Force is not an entity, this is the absolute worst quote you could have brought up. Either you don?t know or simply don?t understand what George is implying in the above excerpt:"

Oh, so now you are telling me that midichlorians "are" the Force?

BTW...

In the 1970s biologist Lynn Margulis resurrected a theory that structures called mitochondria found within cells of complex organisms are actually the evolutionary remnants of bacterial parasites. Armed with the tools of molecular biology, she showed

 

bad radio

Any luck with finding something to back up the idea of the Dark Side as a distinct, seperate and conscious entity to the jedi's Force?

I dont think there's any way one could argue, especially after TPM, that the Force is not an entity in itself (I don't see how something that has a Will of it's own, can control your actions etc. can NOT be an entity)- what I am disagreeing with is your argument that the Dark Side is an entity in itself, distinct from the Force that the Jedi follow. (Note- I don't believe it's conincidence that the "light side" has never been mentioned in the films- don't believe that the concept of a light side to mirror the dark side is one that exists in the Star Wars saga.)

For what it's worth, the way I see it is that emotions like fear, hate and anger don't come from the Force, but from the individual. Those emotions are purely selfish, and when acted on lead to an individual acting on them, thinking selfishly instead of thinking of the bigger picture, and acting out of their own desires etc- which is what the Dark Side is all about. This is what ESB was hammering home. AOTC (and, I assume, Episode III, are about how it's not just these purely negative emotions which can lead this way, but how they can spring from positive emotions- how love can just as easily lead to selfish acts.)

On the other hand, when a Jedi is mindful of his/her emotions and is in control of them rather than letting them control him, then (s)he becomes a more passive, calm "receptor" to the Force- not trying to impose their own will on the Force, but allowing the Force to carry out it's will through them through his intuition, through his feelings which are in touch with the Force.

(I was going to say that it's about the distinction between feelings and emotions, but I just checked my dictionary and the definitions of each of them seem to refer back to the other. Maybe I just need a new dictionary... Anyway, hopefully the above will get my point across...)

MeBeJedi

George Lucas: "I read a lot of books about mythology and theories behind mythology; on of the books was The Hero of a Thousand Faces by Joseph Campbell, but there were many others, maybe as many as fifty books. [...] I wanted to take all religions, major religions and primitive religions and come up with something they might have in common. It worked better as I got less specific...So the real essence was to try to deal with the Force but not to be too specific about it."

>>>>Lucas' final product is not in line with Campbell's ideas. Again, your sources are outdated by the films, both chronologically and philosophically.

But what Lucas is talking about is doing exactly what Campbell was doing. The difference being that Campbell's "Hero of a thousand Faces" is an academic study about the common elements to the "hero" stories from all over the world, throughout history, and is really quite dull to read, while the Force in Star Wars is an amalagamation of the common elements to the "god" stories, and is really quite cool to watch!

It seems to me that that's why he specifically namechecks Campbell- because it's not just the ideas about mythology that he's taken from him, but also his method of studying it and looking for common elements to create a "universal" story, or rather in the case of Star Wars, a god.

 

on of the books was The Hero of a Thousand Faces by Josebaph Campbell, but there were many others, maybe as many as fifty books.

"But what Lucas is talking about is doing exactly what Campbell was doing."

Fine. But the fact that they did the same thing doesn't mean they ended up with the same end product.

Lucas started with Campbell's ideas, as well as "as many as fifty [other] books", and created his own ideas. The quote higher than that talks about how much the concept of the Force changed even from his own ideas. bad_radio wants to believe that Campbell's concepts are exactly like Lucas', and that simply isn't the case, based on Lucas' own words.

"but also his method of studying it and looking for common elements to create a "universal" story, or rather in the case of Star Wars, a god."

Again, he started with the concept of a "God"...

MOYERS: What do you make of the fact that so many people have interpreted your work as being profoundly religious?

LUCAS: I don't see Star Wars as profoundly religious. I see Star Wars as taking all the issues that religion represents and trying to distill them down into a more modern and easily accessible construct--that there is a greater mystery out there. I remember when I was 10 years old, I asked my mother, "If there's only one God, why are there so many religions?" I've been pondering that question ever since, and the conclusion I've come to is that all the religions are true.

MOYERS: Is one religion as good as another?

LUCAS: I would say so. Religion is basically a container for faith. And faith in our culture, our world and on a larger issue, the mystical level--which is God, what one might describe as a supernatural, or the things that we can't explain--is a very important part of what allows us to remain stable, remain balanced.
___________________________

MOYERS: Do you have an opinion, or are you looking?

LUCAS: I think there is a God. No question. What that God is or what we know about that God, I'm not sure. The one thing I know about life and about the human race is that we've always tried to construct some kind of context for the unknown. Even the cavemen thought they had it figured out. I would say that cavemen understood on a scale of about 1. Now we've made it up to about 5. The only thing that most people don't realize is the scale goes to 1 million.

MOYERS: The central ethic of our culture has been the Bible. Like your stories, it's about the fall, wandering, redemption, return. But the Bible no longer occupies that central place in our culture today. Young people in particular are turning to movies for their inspiration, not to organized religion.

LUCAS: Well, I hope that doesn't end up being the course this whole thing takes, because I think there's definitely a place for organized religion. I would hate to find ourselves in a completely secular world where entertainment was passing for some kind of religious experience.

MOYERS: You said you put the Force into Star Wars because you wanted us to think on these things. Some people have traced the notion of the Force to Eastern views of God--particularly Buddhist--as a vast reservoir of energy that is the ground of all of our being. Was that conscious?

LUCAS: I guess it's more specific in Buddhism, but it is a notion that's been around before that. When I wrote the first Star Wars, I had to come up with a whole cosmology: What do people believe in? I had to do something that was relevant, something that imitated a belief system that has been around for thousands of years, and that most people on the planet, one way or another, have some kind of connection to.I didn't want to invent a religion. I wanted to try to explain in a different way the religions that have already existed. I wanted to express it all.

Lucas took the concept of "God" and diffused it, so that it could be almost anything (despite bad_radio's claims to the contrary.) He doesn't want people to confuse the Force [

 

1) Bad Radio and MayBeJedi, thanks for the interesting posts, though no thanks for the petty sniping that you've put in them. I have a question for you both:

do you think that Episode III will verify your views on the nature of the Force?

I ask this because there's obviously lots that has to be covered in the movie and we haven't had a huge amount of talk about the Force in the movies (hence both of you consulting early scripts and other material).

2) MayBeJedi, I'd like to understand your position better on this one point, taken from page 2 of this thread:

"FYI, the dark side is an entity, which is evidenced by the cave in Yoda?s swamp:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LUKE: There?s something not right here. I feel cold, death.
YODA: That place? is strong with the dark side of the Force. A domain of evil it is. In you must go.

? From The Empire Strikes Back screenplay
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------"

Sensing something doesn't automatically make it an "entity". This is foreshadowing. You'll need more proof than that to convince me. Considering how many different definitions of the Force we've gotten from the films, it would appear that it is simply an amalgamation of all beliefs (as stated by Lucas), the specific nature of which is unimportant to the films.

to me, Yoda's warning has always sounded like "evil spirits live there" or something. If the Dark Side isn't an entity, what did Yoda mean when he said, "That place? is strong with the dark side of the Force."

 

"MayBeJedi"

MeBeJedi

"no thanks for the petty sniping"

He's pettier.