PT "Mourn them do not; Miss them do not."-Good advice or bad advice?

Whether or not it would work, I think isn't the issue. And Anakin doesn't seem to give details on his issues. Yoda gives the answer he wants to give.

 

If we can't judge whether advise is good or bad based off whether or not it works or not, then that means me telling you to put sugar in your gas tank in order to make you car fly isn't bad advice.

Is that really the parameters you expect other people to use? Cause I'm telling you flat out, no, I will not join you in that line of thought.

Honestly, I think we're done here. Please feel free to share these parameters with someone else.

 

Am I arguing that his advice was fully good? I was arguing that Yoda was giving the response that he, in the full fiction of this universe, may have thought was the response to give, irregardless of how it made Anakin feel. Personally I think Anakin being catered to is a not helpful approach. But I also think Yoda's approach wasn't as emotionally reading as I think could've helped, not necessarily Anakin, but in reading his emotional state and I think that's a flaw for Yoda in this scene and some other jedi.

 

Can we judge based on the wisdom of the advice itself? Yoda gave Anakin the exact advice that would have stopped Padme from dying. He gave Anakin the advice that, if followed, would have prevented his vision from coming true, which is what Anakin wanted.

 

You don't know that. Even had Anakin listened to Yoda, he might still have ended up losing Padme due to pregnancy complications.

 

I do know that, because that's the story. It was a self-fulfilling prophecy. That's how a self-fulfilling prophecy works, the person trying to stop it actually causes it to happen. This is supposed to be tragic. It's not some ultimately irrelevant act where if Anakin didn't cause his own nightmare to come true, then she would have slipped on a banana peel and died, anyway. That's not the story being told, nor is it implied.

There is no sign that Padme's pregnancy presents any danger to her, and it's not what actually killed her. If she was having pregnancy complications, the medical droids would have known. Medically, she was completely healthy even as she was dying, which just blows up any idea that the death Anakin saw was anything that could be prevented by medical intervention.

We know what killed Padme: Anakin's actions. If Anakin had just stayed in the council chambers and trained himself to let go, he would not have taken the actions that broke Padme's heart and caused her to lose the will to live.

Yoda's advice would have worked, if it had been followed. I judge advice based on it's own wisdom, which is based on the probability of results if followed. Therefore, I judge Yoda's advice to be good advice, tragically cast aside by a troubled youth.

 

Then why don't his dream visions actually happen? Obviously Anakin's actions changed the visions he foresaw. (the dream stuff were alternate takes and are therefore different than what actually happened in the movie) So...?

If Anakin doing nothing causes Padme to die the way he foresaw... and Anakin's actions in the movie also lead to Padme dying in a slightly different way than what he foresaw... then that means there's a possibility that a different set of choices (that we never see in the film) could have led to her not dying... or it was pre-ordained to occur regardless of Anakin's action's. We have no way to know.

 

Preordained to occur, regardless of Anakin's actions? Hmm, it's almost as if his story was written by the hand of some all knowing, yet strangely mediocre, divine creator.

 

GL thinks of things like ethics, morality, philosophy, etc as some sort of math equation. Which, in case anyone hasn't noticed, IS NOT HOW LIFE WORKS. And therefore, the universe of the PT seems to exist in some weird hellscape where the only way to grieve is to just rejoice (except when it's Qui-Gon apparently). Again, Yoda seems to fall into the DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO category.

 

Since we're discussing finished movies that have been "out there" for decades, I guess it is somewhat inevitable that we have some discussions over and over. I mention that only because I TRY my best - with limited effectiveness - to have my say and move on, not to beat a dead horse. BUT... here I go again...sorry. LOL

I would argue that the movies do an amazing job of illustrating the point that too much attachment can be dangerous, and destructive, and hurtful. Anakin is the poster boy for it! Racked by anger and grief over the murder of his mother, he slaughters "men, women and children" (Tuskens). Terrified that his wife might die - I would argue that he is terrified of the pain he might feel IF she would die, which is not the same thing and which speaks DIRECTLY to the dangers of too much attachment - Anakin helps Sidious avoid capture (It doesn't matter if you believe Sidious was faking in his fight with Windu - Anakin believes he is intervening on his behalf), pretty much gets Mace killed, personally leads an attack on the Jedi temple (killing former teachers, mentors, colleagues and friends), personally slaughters children, murders a roomful of pretty much helpless "Separatist" politicians, and allies himself with a Sith Lord bent on enslaving the galaxy. He tries to kill his mentor and friend Obi-Wan and chokes his pregnant wife.

I'd say that if anyone needs to hear that too much attachment can be dangerous...it's ANAKIN.

And - again, being repetitious - do any of us really believe that all Anakin has heard from the Jedi over the years is "Hey, don't grieve. When people die, just move on. Next"? If you want to fault the movies for not spending more time delving more deeply into Jedi training, I hear you - although I don't know, realistically, how much of that you could do in what are essentially 2 to 3 hour sci fi action movies. There are many many philosophies across the world that offer similar advice, phrased in different ways - not "You ought to be an unemotional robot" but warning that too much attachment, too much fear of inevitable change, can easily lead down dangerous and toxic paths, can inspire fear and suffering. Granted, the movie only gives us a few brief scenes where Yoda offers some very succinct, "un-nuanced" advice. But really... do you think that is all there is to Jedi training and teaching?

PS: BTW - Anakin has done all he can, throughout, to ensure the Jedi don't KNOW how messed up he is. I realize that some fault the Jedi for THIS too... they "should" have sensed it, they should have "seen it through the Force" or some such. Maybe so; the movies do suggest that the Jedi can sense mood and thought and the like (Vader definitely can - is that a Sithy thing or a Jedi vestige?). But the idea that Anakin was left adrift cuts him a lot of slack. He hides the Tusken slaughter, he hides his love for Padme, he hides his marriage to Padme, etc. He conceals and lies and covers up generally because he wants to have his cake and eat it too. He wants all the honor and glory and power of being a Jedi AND he wants Padme AND he doesn't want anything to risk any of that.

 

In reference to the second and third highlighted parts...

The movie presents what it presents. The characters responses are based around what the movie presents. If the audience is supposed to infer something from dialogue other than what it is, then there needs to be some established characterization that explains this.

But we're talking about a director who seems to feel his movies work better as silent films and therefore he doesn't put as much effort into dialogue as other directors do. But if I'm supposed to hear a line of dialogue and infer that the character doesn't mean what they're saying, then some other aspect of the film needs to support this.

Just saying that obviously these characters aren't always like this because that wouldn't make sense... is the exact reason why I say these movies don't really make sense. You essentially have to write a better movie in your head when watching the PT.

And as far as the first highlighted part...

Anakin's problem isn't attachment. It's possessiveness. And honestly, at the time of writing these films, I don't think George Lucas understood the difference between those two things. He might still not. Lucas is a smart man, but listening to him try to explain deep and meaningful aspects of humanity sounds like someone who knows about these things from reading up on them... but has never actually experienced them.

 

************

I half agree, and half disagree, re "if the audience is supposed to infer something other than what it is..."

AGREE: The less familiar something might be to an audience, the stranger it might be to an audience, the more explanation I think it requires. It may very well be that the average moviegoer has little exposure to, say, Stoicism, or Buddhism, or other philosophies that talk about a lot of the things that the Jedi seem to embrace. Given that, it couldn't hurt to delve in more. The biggest example of this, to me, is the idea of how early Jedi training starts. I recall a lot of "What the what?" at the time that was first raised. So, if your point is that those making a movie have to consider explaining things outside an audience's typical "comfort zone", can't argue.

DISAGREE: I don't think it is a "heavy lift" to expect the audience to understand that Anakin has undergone a LOT of training. A LOT. I think he has been with the Jedi ten years at the time of AOTC? It's pretty obvious, isn't it, that in those years he has been trained not just in combat, but in Jedi philosophy, mindset, how to get his mind in "the right place", and so forth? I don't think we need Yoda to say "Anakin, you've had years of training concerning attachment, grief, death, and how to deal with all of that. You know that the Jedi blah blah blah" (not even going to try to put that in Yoda-speak!). I think the problem people have is they don't like/agree with/buy into the philosophy, not that it isn't explained.

Slightly also disagree re attachment and possessiveness, although maybe it is a quibble. Isn't possessiveness, arguably, excessive attachment? Anakin is terrified of losing Padme. Is that "possessiveness"? I suppose so, maybe. Is it "excessive attachment"? I'd argue it is. But I don't think that is a big distinction, more a matter of how you want to define "attachment" and "possessiveness".

 

It's not even so much a comfort zone as it is people trying to understand what these concepts mean through the eye of George Lucas. He's taken worldly concepts that people have philosophized over for centuries... and tried to simplify it down for easy consumption for an 8 year old. Once you do that, things become borderline nonsensical. Imagine trying to make a trilogy of films about the fall of democracy.. but then having to dumb down that democracy so that kids can understand it. Once you take out too many variables, it ceases to make any sense which means your audience isn't actually getting enough information and they now HAVE TO ALREADY KNOW about this stuff. Just taking the movie as it's own then doesn't work anymore. So again...

But WHAT has he been trained in. The audience is never given a straight introduction to the principles of the Jedi teachings in TPM. I know Lucas likes to treat his films like foreign films where maybe you don't understand everything right away, but some actual exposition about what the hell the Jedi even are would have been very useful in TPM. You mention philosophy and mindset. Okay, what are those things? We get Yoda's spiel about fear leading to one thing and then one thing leading to another and eventually landing on the dark side. Okay, but what type of fear? Can a fear of spiders lead to the dark side? That's a different type of fear, right? Is a kid going to understand that? We're given fortune cookie wisdom and then expected to fill in a ten year long blank period. Is that good filmmaking? It's not to me.

 

About what Anakin had been trained in.

That is part of the problem, Anakin has been a Jedi for over a decade and he is a Jedi Knight. So what Yoda tells him should not be news to him.
It would be things he would have been told over and over again during his training.
But apparently he has not learned.
And for Yoda to just repeat the same lesson, despite knowing that Anakin has heard it all before and not once considering that maybe he should change how he goes about this. If a student has not learned the lesson after nine times of being told the same thing. Telling it a tenth time is not likely to work.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

Or, on the reverse side, ROTS is the first time that Anakin has been told to train himself to let go of everything he fears to lose. Which also doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense.

But the kicker is, it's one or the other and neither of them really works.

 

I wager that would’ve been one of the first lessons he’d learn as a Jedi. No way would they have waited 13 years before going, ‘Mm, now would be a good time to teach Anakin how to let go of things he’s attached to.’

 

I think the scene comes off as Yoda just reminding Anakin of what he already knows. Think of it from his perspective. Anakin, a fully trained Jedi Knight, comes to him for guidance because he is troubled by visions of someone dying. That could happen to anyone, even Yoda himself. You're not immune to the unbalancing powers of your emotions just because you've learned how to control them. With practice, you'll get better and better at it, but it's a constant struggle.
So, he basically says to Anakin "Remember what you've been taught" to keep him on the right path.

 

Except problems;
1) Anakin was a special case, he had baggage that other Jedi did not have and initially, the Jedi rejected him for that. And Yoda was still against Anakin being trained, at least by Obi-Wan. So his fears and attachments was a big worry to the Jedi.
2) Anakin's Force potential is higher than any living Jedi and thus if he falls, he could do a lot more damage. Plus he is their chosen one, the only one who can kill the Sith and bring balance. If they loose him, they are screwed.
3) To tie back to something I have debated earlier, did Yoda know about what went on with Anakin in AotC?
That he had bad dreams about his mother, that he went to Tatooine? Yoda at least knows that something bad happened with Anakin. If Yoda knows that Anakin had dreams/visions of his mother in pain and his mother was beaten to death. So his visions were true. And Anakin suffered badly as a result. If Anakin again has visions of this sort then it is likely that they will also come true. And Anakin would again feel really terrible. If Yoda knows this, should that play a part in what he says?

Bye for now.
The Guarding Dark

 

"Let's give him to Obi-Wan, literally at the same time Obi-Wan is even knighted. This should turn out fine."

-The Jedi-