Saga Did the Jedi lose their way?

I've been thinking about this question a lot lately. There seems to be two main common schools of thought that I have encountered on this forum. Apologies in advance if I misrepresent anyone here.

One group argues that the Jedi did not lose their way but were simply deceived by Palpatine and failed to discover his plot until it was too late and, even then, only because of Anakin's betrayal.

The second is that the Jedi did indeed lose their way, at least to some extent.This line of thought tends to hold up Qui Gon and Luke as examples of what a "true Jedi" should be. Qui Gon goes against the council in TPM by insisting to train Anakin while Luke goes against Obi Wan's instructions in ROTJ and tries to save Vader. The argument goes that the Jedi council lacks compassion in comparison and have become detached by the time of the prequels and that this contributes to the rise of the Sith. Luke is then able to restore the true values of the order after ROTJ (though obviously this doesn't work out in the ST).

Given what we see in the films I am partial to the second interpretation but I would like to hear counter arguments.

 

What I see is that, ''the power'' should be controlled, or ''the power'' will control others eventually. The Jedi have the power for no doubt, they can do things that other people can't do. Yes, it's not a exactly a super power like Hulk or Thor has, they can't alone go against the armies on their own, but they still have a power, they call them ''space wizards'' for a reason.

So when they don't fight ''evil'' Sith, and when there is no Sith, or dark side to fight, they almost become useless, and in time they have become political. The director also mentioned this, he didn't say why, but he said they have become political, and except for Qui-Gon, and later Yoda, they lost their ways.

But as I said, this is also because I believe, Sith decided to go hiding instead of fighting Jedi directly in open war, which kind of lead Jedi to become political during this 1000 years gap without Sith.

 

I voted yes and no because I agree with argument/perspective 1 in that the Jedi were manipulated but the reason why they could be so easily leads me to espouse perspective 2. They've become locked into not being guardians of peace and justice so much as the extension and mouthpiece of the politicos/Senate. And the more corrupt the Republic becomes the more imbalanced the Jedi's overarching mandate.

 

There's nothing in Lucas's movies, or in Lucas's own comments on this topic, that supports the idea that the Jedi lost their way.

 

I'd say that in the PT they went from being guardians of peace & justice to heading off the overthrow an entire elected government on their own initiative demonstrates that they had, indeed, lost focus. Yes, they were played by Palpatine, but he exploited flaws that already existed, in both individual Jedi (like Ani) and the Order as a whole.

 

Oh they most certainly did!

 

I'm not sure the Jedi lost their way, but those in control of the Jedi Council probably did. Overly beaureacrat, dominated by a few strong personalities, and dissenting opinions not welcome. Classic case of group think and yes men. That's my impression anyway.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

 

No I believe Prequel Jedi is what humans should be in real life

 

There’s a widespread conception that the Jedi forbiddance of attachment is inhuman, sociopathic, or not the “true Jedi” way.(like the idea that Qui-Gon opposed Yoda’s philosophy or Yoda changed his beliefs on Dagobah) they are consistent in their beliefs in both trilogies. This teaching is based on real world beliefs about how humans are to prevent suffering knowing that you and everyone you love will inevitably die and George Lucas made the Star Wars prequels to show this

 

Mace Windu: The boy has exceptional skills.
Obi-Wan: But he still has much to learn, Master. His abilities have made him... well, arrogant.
Yoda: Yes. Yes. A flaw more and more common among Jedi. Too sure of themselves they are. Even the older, more experienced ones.

I think this bit of dialogue (as well as earlier dialogue showing Mace Windu in particular to be arrogantly wrong about a bunch of stuff) establishes the Jedi as having lost their way at least in one sense.

 

Filoni, who of course was given story direction during TCW from GL, said that the assessment that they had lost their way and were in the trawls of the Dark Lord, as being a correct assessment.

 

I'm familiar with Filoni's opinion on the matter. More importantly, I'm also familiar with George Lucas' opinion and the differences between the two.

There's a difference between being trapped/deceived and losing one's way. The Jedi didn't lose their way, anymore than the few honorable senators within the Republic lost their way. They were simply trapped in their positions of servants.

 

This presumes a level of pacifically on the part of the Jedi which borders upon the incompetent and complacent, which I would argue amounts to losing one's way given their stated mission. They were all together far too uncritical of the situation going on around them, or if they were critical, they were unwilling to act decisively due to a misplaced sense of duty and honour to serve a decaying system.

 

In what way were the Jedi incompetent, complacent, or uncritical of the situation going on around them? Keep in mind that the Jedi, or any character for that matter, are not omniscient nor do they have the knowledge the audience has.

 

They are aware that the state which they are serving has become corrupt and ineffectual, giving rise to a constitutional crisis in the form of threatened separatism. When the crisis escalates to civil war they take the side of the loyalist by commanding an army of slaves against what is acknowledged to be people with honest grievances against the system. At this point it's arguable, by not abstaining from an active part in the prosecution of the war effort (and not taking the role of negotiators, like a neutral party or the Red Cross in our world), how they are serving peace or justice in the Republic? By wars end Padme is outright saying that the Republic effectively no longer exists, which means that the Jedi are, for all intents and purposes, lending their abilities to a proto-fascist state.

 

Incorrect. The Jedi serve the Republic, not those who decide to leave it. And the war didn't start because the Separatists simply decided to leave, but because as Dooku (the leader of the Separatist movement) revealed, they were planning to attack the Republic.

The Jedi, as servants of the Republic, were drafted into service as generals of the Republic's army. And they never treated the clones as slaves. They served alongside them and treated them as individuals.

The Jedi are not in the war because they endorse it. They are in the war because they are servants of the Republic they swore to serve. A Republic that for all intents and purposes (as far as everyone but the Sith knew) was under attack. And their only goal is to end the war and restore peace.

Padmé may "recognize" that by the time the war ends, but the totalitarian power was given by the senate and its senators, not by the Jedi, years before. The Jedi are not happy that there is a war, and they are not happy with the Chancellor either, specially with the growing amount of power he obtained throughout the war. That's completely beside the point.

As Lucas explains, it's not the role of the Jedi to get involved in the political process. They can't stop the senate from willingly giving away its power to the Chancellor, nor should they. The Jedi need to let the political process go, and they do.

 

"Life creates the Force, and makes it grow." Jedi are supposed to be servants of the Force, and life, which means people first, not republics or senates. By becoming servants of political entities, they fell from their duty to people.

 

This is the key exchange, I think, which serves as evidence that the Jedi lost their way. Let me try to break it down:
a) Individual Jedi becoming arrogant is not sufficient to prove that the order, as a body, has lost its way.
b) To show this you would need evidence that either, the core tenets of the Jedi's teachings have changed OR
c) The leadership (ie. the Jedi council) has become corrupt.

There is no evidence for (b), at least as far as I'm aware so the core of the debate should center around (c).

So is there evidence that the council has lost their way? Some common accusations are:
1) The Jedi express belief that Dooku cannot have turned because he is a former Jedi and "its not in his character."
2) Mace is prepared to execute Palpatine on the spot without a trial.
3) Yoda's "Failed, I have" and later "Wars not make one great" are interpreted by many as admonitions of guilt/regret.
4) Obi Wan believes that Vader is beyond redemption, Luke proves him wrong.

However:
1) It could be argued that this misplaced trust in Dooku arose from the Jedi's personal relationship with him as opposed to an arrogant belief in their own infallibility.
2) This could be justified given the grave consequences if Palpatine escapes and considering that he has control over the senate and the courts.
3) These statements could easily be interpreted in other ways. The former as a simple statement regarding Yoda's immediate failure to defeat Sidious, the latter as a broad statement on the ugly nature of war.
4) Yoda does not tell Luke that he must destroy Vader, only confront him. This is a blind spot for Obi Wan and not necessarily indicative of a lack of compassion on the part of the council or the order large writ.

I am a little on the fence myself as much of this is a matter of interpretation. Does anyone know if Lucas has said anything about these scenes specifically?

But they do get involved later when they agree to remove the Chancellor from office if he won't give up his emergency powers.

 

Eh, Palpatine is a product of 1000 years of Sith planning, and Sith growing stronger with each generation. I don't think it would be fair to say it's just Palpatine, for the Sith part.

As for the Jedi part, I think their ability to see and predict the future was blinded by the dark side of the Force, mostly because of Sidious and because of his previous Sith lords before Sidious such as Plagueis.

I think Filoni's opinion is based on what he sees in Phantom Menace, he says Qui-Gon isn't part of the Jedi Council, Qui-Gon even declines their offer to take a seat in Jedi Council in new canon novel, because Qui-Gon knows Jedi lost their way. Which is why basically, Qui-Gon was ahead of every Jedi in the PT except for Yoda, and which is why we've seen Qui-Gon's story, and the story of his apprentices Obi-Wan and Anakin, and which is why Qui-Gon even teaches Yoda how to be immortal, as Yoda says ''An old friend has learned to path to immortality''. If the best Jedi that we've seen in the movies is not even part of the Jedi council, then there is something wrong with that Jedi council, that's what Lucas wrote for Phantom Menace.

 

I went with no. I think more what really happened is they became too widely integrated and involved in too much. They always had the same basic intentions, but the state of the Republic caused things to get away from them, and they became more or less overwhelmed...watered down...spread too thin.

 

I think Anakin joining to the Sith was never on the table until Maul ''seemingly'' died in Phantom Menace, and that was before Qui-Gon believing that Anakin wouldn't turn to the dark side, after the death of Maul, Palpatine was forced to turn another Jedi to the dark side, because he wasn't planning that before because he already had a perfectly trained Sith apprentice Maul.

So what happened in Phantom Menace was a bad trade and tragedy for both sides; Jedi lost Qui-Gon, Sith lost Maul, thus Anakin can become a candidate for the empty Sith apprentice seat, because Maul died because of fighting against Qui-Gon + his apprentice Obi-Wan, and because Qui-Gon died due to fighting Maul, Anakin become even more vulnerable to the dark side, as he lost his father figure Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan could never replace Qui-Gon at that point.

When you consider this; Maul isn't dead, Qui-Gon isn't dead (at least until he fully trains Anakin) there could be no problem at all. Anakin wouldn't be vulnerable to the dark side when Qui-Gon is still alive, and no Jedi can take Maul's place in the Sith since Maul's alive.

Qui-Gon was indeed ahead of every Jedi in PT, except for Yoda. There is a reason that Qui-Gon trained Obi-Wan perfectly, and there is a reason that Qui-Gon finds the way to immortality, and he teaches that to even Yoda.

If Qui-Gon didn't take Anakin as his apprentice, and if he didn't tell Obi-Wan to train Anakin, what would happen? I think the Sith would still succeed.

Yes, maybe both Maul and Qui-Gon would died and Obi-Wan could succeed against Maul again. But then, who could stop the next new Sith Lord, + resurrected Maul in the Clone Wars, + Sidious?

-Obi-Wan failed against Dooku several times.
-Obi-Wan again failed against Maul in the Clone Wars several times. At one point, even Mace Windu failed against Maul in the Clone Wars (Son of Dathomir comic book issue 03)
-And we know for sure that Obi-Wan couldn't do anything against Sidious.

And If I remember correctly, Anakin says that he saved Obi-Wan's life more than once (could be 9th time saving Obi-Wan's life in Revenge of the Sith).

So to assume that if not for Anakin, the Jedi would succeed against the Sith is wrong in my opinion.

Remember; even if we act like everything would be the same without Anakin, (without Anakin's success against Dooku and saving Obi-Wan's life several times), and if we assume that Anakin wouldn't be in Chancellor's office to betray Mace Windu to save Sidious, that scene would never happen without Anakin in the big picture.

Because remember; Sidious himself told his real identity to Anakin, and then Anakin told that to Mace Windu, thus that leading Mace Windu + other Jedi to surprise attack Sidious at Chancellor's office, if not for Anakin, Mace Windu and other Jedi could never learn Sidious's true identity, thus the duel between Mace Windu and Sidious wouldn't happen, Sidious would just activate Order 66 at some point and end the war and end the Jedi, with Anakin or without Anakin. So I don't see a way to save the Jedi with Anakin or without Anakin in PT.

And in the end, Anakin betrays Sidious in RotJ and saves Luke, and Anakin plays his role successfully in RotJ. Without Anakin, that would also never happen, so no one could stop Sidious in RotJ and after.

 

No, Jedi are not supposed to be servants of the Force. They work with the will of the Force, in a balanced way, to serve the people they were entrusted with. In this case, the people within the Republic that give them jurisdiction to act as keepers of peace and justice.

No, they do not agree to anything. They simply discuss what they might need to do if the worse thing happens.

None of that is established in TPM. In TPM, Qui-Gon is a maverick who often clashes with the Council, but there is no animosity between each other. Qui-Gon does respect and follow the will of the Council, even if they disagree. That means he respects the Jedi Order and the Jedi way they all share.

No, it isn't. That's taking Filoni's opinion as fact while ignoring everything the movies present us with. Qui-Gon is not ahead of anyone. Qui-Gon is not "the best Jedi". Qui-Gon is simply a Jedi. Same with Yoda, same with Obi-Wan, etc.

Qui-Gon teaches Yoda how to retain his identity because he learned from someone else, the Force Priestesses, and those he taught were no different from him in that regard and were deemed worthy of the knowledge.

 

I feel that even without Anakin as a Sith-or even being part of the picture, the Jedi were fighting a losing battle anyway. The corruption in the Republic and the emergence of the clone wars came about despite Anakin being part of the picture. By the time we reach the end of the clone wars, IMO there's no way the Jedi would've been able to kill Palpatine and expect to take control of the senate and bring back peace the way they thought they could. There would have been such the backlash. Yoda was right when he expressed how dangerous that was. And order 66 was still in Sidious' plans-regardless of Anakin's actions. Darth Vader was simply a tool Sidious used to help him in this.

I feel that the fall of the Republic, destruction of the Jedi and emergence of the Empire would still have happened, even without Anakin either turning to the Darkside, or even without him in the picture at all. I suppose if Anakin had never turned, he could've helped the Rebellion (and any remaining Jedi) defeat the Empire-and it would've happened in much less time. But IMO the fall of the Republic was too well-seeded by the Sith, and no actions by any one person would've been enough to prevent it by the time of TPM.