Discussion in 'Prequel Trilogy' started by antitoxicgamer, Sep 9, 2020.
I hope you got paid well.
My issue with the Jedi in the prequels is they seem to have no moral qualms with using an army of slaves, and it’s implied they go around taking children away from their families.
I don't think that's particularly said. Qui-Gon doesn't just take Anakin. There's a discussion about it. Anakin doesn't leave without he and his mom talking. The mom gives her okay. Nowhere is it said in the movies that the jedi just take children and nowhere is it said they are slaves. In AOTC we're presented with the idea that jedi can leave, though Obi-Wan says it's a commitment not easily broken, and I think Padme says that Anakin can be expelled from the jedi in ROTS.
Pretty sure the “Army of Slaves” is meant to refer to the Clones, not the Jedi themselves.
The slave army I was referring to was the clone army.
So if Anakin is too old (according to the council) to be a Jedi, then how are Jedi recruited? We know the Jedi aren’t breeding. So this suggests the Jedi have some unknown method of finding infants with high midichlorian counts and convincing families to give them up. Unless we’re supposed to think that all of the force sensitive children and infants are given away by parents who don’t want them. If this is the case, wouldn’t the Jedi be worried about a bunch of untrained force users running around wild in the galaxy?
Sorry for my misunderstanding.
The other thing: I don't know what the jedi are supposed to do about other potential force users, if they're not given consent. I think the jedi are shown to decline Anakin in TPM and show no other regard for that, in spite of his attributes. I don't necessarily think the movies leave anything other than the jedi just go on with their situation. What would they do otherwise? I don't think it's said the jedi can't breed.
I think Ki-Adi-Mundi was the only one who was allowed to breed due to his Specie's low birth rate, or something
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
thats not in the movies tough so we can ignore the eu on this.
That was the point. We see the fall of the Republic, and thus the fall of the Jedi Order. They have lost contact with the Force. I think this is a good decision by Lucas.
The prequels didn’t ruin the Jedi - they were still heroic but became more layered and interesting, flaws and all.
Regarding children, it has been documented that the Jedi ask the parents if they'd be willing to give their child up to serve the Force and the galaxy as a Jedi. And as mentioned-Anakin was the one who chose of his own free will to become a Jedi. And agreed-there are several instances that prove that Jedi can leave the order at will.
Regarding the clones...IS it truly slavery for an individual to serve the very purpose for which they were originally created? This is a more complex idea-cos there is a LOT of baggage that comes with the concept of a human clone (That's why I hope it never happens-can you imagine the political/human rights implications!?). I don't really know myself. But I do know the most basic definition of slavery is involuntary servitude. If the clones were originally created to serve the Republic as soldiers-and that is their purpose in life, are they doing something they don't want to do? If they want to do it-then the simplest thought is that it's not truly slavery, based on the word's basic definition. If they want to leave...that's when things get muddy. I know TCW series covered some instances of this, but I can't remember how the other clones treated that idea. Were they seen as deserters?
I know this is a loaded topic, and for the record-I'm not saying something difinitive on this in either direction-I'm honestly more just asking the questions that inevitably come up with the clones, for discussions' sake.
I see "the most basic definition of slavery" as being property, buyable and sellable.
A slave with "no desire to leave" because they've been indoctrinated from birth, is just as much a slave, as someone who's been kidnapped before being sold by their kidnappers.
It certainly made them less likable. In OT and ST the Jedi seem human and transcendent. In tr Prequels they are stuffy, pompous, and hypocritical.
Amen. Yoda’s advice is heartless in that scene.
The Jedi had put themselves into that situation a long time ago by agreeing to serve the Galactic Senate - who were the ones who had decided to use the Clone army against the Separatists.
What is this opinion supposed to mean? That the Jedi were better written in the OT and the ST, because they came off as "transcendent"? What does that mean? Were the Jedi supposed to be perfect? That so-called perfection was tossed out of the window the moment Luke discovered that both Obi-Wan and Yoda had failed to inform him that Vader and Anakin were one and the same in TESB. Obi-Wan's excuses for his lies and his attempt to convince Luke to kill Anakin in ROTJ did not help matters. As for the ST . . . I don't know what was going on in that trilogy. Especially with Luke.
Were the Jedi supposed to be saints? Paragons of perfection? They were individuals - flawed individuals - who had joined a religious order. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm not making excuses for their mistakes. I just don't think they should have been portrayed as ideal or perfect. The latter is poor characterization to me.
What I meant is the Jedi in the OT and ST they were flawed and transcendent, relatable but had ideals we strive for. In the Prequels they are too dogmatic and unbending.
In the OT and ST the Jedi as INDIVIDUALS were flawed. In the PT the Jedi Order AS A WHOLE has a systemic flaw, the flaw of arrogance. And it would be tragic if not for the fact that Yoda, a sitting member of the Jedi Council, acknowledges this flaw and chooses to do absolutely nothing about it.
Yes. They were too dogmatic and unbending. Lucas had went out of his way in pointing out this flaw of the Jedi in the PT. That is why both Yoda and Obi-Wan required further training by Qui-Gon's ghost during the 19 years between "ROTS" and "ANH". Yet, Obi-Wan had never completely freed himself from this dogmatic way of thinking, even as a Force Ghost.
What is the problem here? Those flawed individuals had allowed the Order to become flawed as a system. I don't think the Jedi Order would have ever become perfected or ideal, because I don't believe individuals are incapable of developing that much. Certainly not as a group.
Because Yoda realizes it. He is a member of the Jedi council and he recognizes a systemic flaw within the ranks of the Jedi and he does absolutely nothing to rectify it. Instead, him and the rest of the council just continue to let the Jedi Order become worse and worse until the people have such little faith in them that, once Palpatine says they're enemies of the state, almost everyone buys it.
Here's the overall thing. Every aspect of the Jedi Order is based around Lucas's need to have Anakin fall to the dark side. So, the Jedi aren't just flawed; they're heavily flawed. They are flawed to the point of where it's almost a contradiction that their Order hasn't collapsed in on itself already. But here's the issue, in the OT we're supposed to route for Luke to become a Jedi, but how can we still do that when we realize how terrible they were? Lucas made the Jedi Order so inherently flawed for the sake of Anakin' story in the PT that it now seems egregious for Luke to want to ever be a Jedi in his story in the OT.
To me though, Yoda seemed just as heartless as described here when he told Luke in ESB that he should just let his friends die. Different situation but its still the same principle. To me this shows that at least Obi-Wan and Yoda didn't really think any different as Jedi between the PT and the OT, as has been suggested on here.
I fully agree with you regarding this concept, concerning someone born in real life as part of the goings on in today's world. I guess the perspective I'm trying to consider it from is from the point of view that these were clones; specifically created in the first place for the very reason of being soldiers to fight for the republic. And I don't really know or think an answer either way-I'm just trying to think about whether it's a bad thing for the clones to be serving the purpose for which they were created, especially if they want to do it. It's a loaded discussion like I said-meaning I can see how many would have differing opinions on this. I myself just brought it up to see what others think cos I have no idea either way.
Well, to be fair, Luke asked if his friends would die and Yoda said it was impossible to tell. Neither Yoda or Ben wrote off Luke's friends as unimportant. They just tried to reiterate to Luke his Jedi training and the ultimate fate of the galaxy was (to them) more important than his friends. Yet I think we all know what the PT Jedi would have said... "Just let them die. Attachments are bad anyway."
Also of note is ROTJ when Ben tells Luke that his feelings can do him credit, but could be made to serve the Emperor. Yet we all know what the PT Jedi would have said...
Lucas took the flaws of Yoda and Obi-Wan, cranked them up to 11, and gave them to the entire Jedi Order. And the mental gymnastics it takes to try and make it seem like Yoda and Obi-Wan learned their lesson between the trilogies (even though they both still clearly have those same flaws) is astounding. Yoda and Obi-Wan being flawed is great, but making those flaws systemic flaws in the entire Order in the PT makes them all seem uncaring and ignorant.
I always found that confusing that Luke was not supposed to try to save them, esp. since Leia was the "other hope." I suppose Yoda thought that Luke would either turn or be killed.
I actually meant the part where Luke was boarding the X-Wing and said "and let Han and Leia die!?" And Yoda said "if you honor what they fight for, yes." (unless that's the part you meant too .) To me, when Yoda reminds Anakin that he should not grieve but rejoice for those that are lost to the Force in ROTS he's simply reminding Anakin of the Jedi's teachings, and he presents this reminder with an equal lack of emotional sensitivity. By this and other moments IMO it shows that the Jedi (at least Yoda and Obi-Wan) had this sense of absolute dedication to the ways of the Force and the big picture-even at the expense of loved ones, and perhaps at the expense of even a certain amount of tact-in both the OT as well as the PT, implying that they really hadn't been presented differently between trilogies in this sense. We just simply see more of it in the PT.
Now, I will be the first to admit that the Jedi in the PT were shown more arrogant and especially complacent than the OT. IMO however that would come naturally after such a long period of peace and not being faced with adversity against their very existence.
good point, I hadn't thought of that.
REAL WORLD EXPLANATION: Leia wasn't his sister yet.
INTERNAL EXPLANATION: The other hope is already in Vader's hands. Do we send what is now our last hope to go and get her and possibly lose both or do we keep the one hope we already have? They tried to get Luke to stay because Leia is already in enemy hands.
This doesn't require me to perform mental gymnastics so thank you. To me, these characteristics come from two characters who have had their entire brotherhood demolished and forced into hiding. They finally have one last hope to fix everything and they're desperate. Then you watch the PT and it's like, "Oh, they're just always like this..."