The Demonizasion of Anakin Skywalker and the Sainthood of Obi-Wan Kenobi. A character discussion.

Marnie's stories of a young Qui-Gon just set the standard - to me, she got him so right that anything else written about him (that contradicts her stories) just seems wrong.

Well said, Dianethx. I never even cared much for fan fiction that didn't star any of the Skywalkers until I read her stories. Her stories are ... well, stories, not fan fiction. To me they are even more canon than the authorized EU books - which is fortunate because I haven't read most of them!

 

l_n, someone's genetically altering the pigs

I thought it was interesting seeing how you viewed the various characters in the story. I especially agree with your reformed view of Dooku. I never understood why people thought he was a completely bad guy, and I've never even read any books or fics with him in them at all! I thought he seemed like a guy with really good intentions who was just fed up with politics and ended up, like many, falling into the trap of becoming a pawn of Sidious.

I do find it interesting how you described your opinion of Obi-Wan. It seems your problem then is with how he is portrayed in some people's fics rather than what the essence of the character really is. I know, I know, characterization is open to interpretation and blah blah... right, how you view a character is open, but I think too many people let their own opinions seep into how they write a character far too easily. Don't let them give a character you might otherwise like a bad name just because they portray him as a Saint. He's certainly not portrayed that way in the films

That's the thing about the Star Wars films. Their storytelling mode tends to be fairly objective. Yes, there are badguys and goodguys clearly defined in some cases, but in others it simply presents the characters and lets you decide. Is Han a bad guy because he shoots Greedo under the table (and shoots FIRST, I might add )? Is Obi-Wan an uptight jerk because he lectures Anakin too much? Is Anakin a rebellious brat who just need to grow up? Or is it some of both? I don't think the films present clearcut answers on these. They let people decide for themselves, especially with the PT, who they like and who they don't. So the interpretation there becomes very subjective. I much more appreciate authors who can reflect the Star Wars feel by creating a more objective tone in their writing and letting the readers decide for themselves. It's tougher, and certainly requires more nuanced, studied writing, but I think in the end it's a much better way to go.

Which is why, frankly, I'm sick of people saying 'well we all have our opinions on what the characters like, so we can write him how we see him'. The first part is right. The second part is not. We hall have different opinions, but the nature of the character is clearly laid out in the films. What you think of the kind of actions he takes is your business, but if you make that decision for your readers, you're going to end up alienating a large portion of them.

That's how I feel about it, anyway.


Now if I can move on to a different topic and bring up something specific. Why is it that people never want to see a lightside Obi-Wan tempted by the Dark Side? There seems to be this expectation that you right him Light Side, which of course is canon , or write him Dark Side, which of course is AU.

I thought we saw in the fight with Maul that Obi-Wan is just as prone to giving into anger as anyone else would be in such a situation. So in an attempt to display how the character developes this cool-headedness that allows him to face Vader straight-faced in ANH, I decided I wanted to show him dealing with that latent anger more. Yet most the readers seemed pretty shocked that I let Obi-Wan get angry during a fight in a directly post-TPM era. My question is, why? To develope something like a cool temper requires more than just one instance of discovering you don't like yourself when you're angry.

Perhaps once all is said and done, readers might see that I'm trying to use this situation as something that would build Obi-Wan's resistance to the Dark Side. I hope so. Because I'd hate to think they believe someone can just say they have any quality, especially a resistance to giving into the Dark Side, without ever having that quality tested.

-sj loves kevin spacey

 

Now if I can move on to a different topic and bring up something specific. Why is it that people never want to see a lightside Obi-Wan tempted by the Dark Side?
Actually there are tons of fics with lightside Obi tempted by the Dark Side. Shaindl's awesome Dark Road fic showed Obi-Wan almost consumed by the Dark in order to do something right.

However, I have to agree with you that Obi-Wan has a lot of anger showing up in the movies. His fight with Maul is an excellent example - the look of hatred in his face was very obvious (to me, at least). And him chewing out Anakin in the trooper transport in AOTC shows another angry Obi-Wan. Even the line to Dooku in AOTC of "He'd never join you." was a cold indignant anger. The Council room in TPM was a hurt, suppressed anger.

When I write canon characters, I really try and picture them in similar situations from the movies. So when I think of Obi-Wan in a situation where he might get angry, I think of the troop carrier. When Qui-Gon gets all cold and stoic, I think of him in the woods just before Obi-Wan apologizes to him. Angry Qui from the fight with Maul. Upset Obi from the Council scene. They all conjure up images that offer specific emotions that I need for certain scenes. The scenes ground me in the characterizations.

 

Which is why, frankly, I'm sick of people saying 'well we all have our opinions on what the characters like, so we can write him how we see him'.

Hear, hear sister! I've given up being shocked. And hey, I know how to discern bad characterizations of Obi-Wan by now. I've always remembered what I thought of him the first time I watched and I decided not to think too highly of fics that contradicted that perception. I guess what I mean is that it doesn't bother me when I read bad characterizations of Obi-Wan, certainly not like Padmé or Qui-Gon for some reason. Poor OB!

You know, one of these days I will pay a visit to that epic of yours. Erm, one thing: you do know how to write Padmé, don't you? Because if you don't, we are so going to lose ground that we've just covered!



Now if I can move on to a different topic and bring up something specific. Why is it that people never want to see a lightside Obi-Wan tempted by the Dark Side?

Ditto dianethx - There are tons of fics exploring that possibility. One of the first stories I read on these boards was an Obi-Wan who defeated Palpatine with the Dark Side and turned the Temple into a virtual Sith Monastery - imbibing customs of secrecy and teaching the younglings the Dark Side in order to protect themselves from another possible Purge. It was very in-character.

The thing about characterization is that it is not impossible to make a canon good character bad or vice versa - the trick is give him/her an in-character reason to switch personalities. One fan fiction that is very dear to my heart is a short story where Queen Amidala stabs Anakin with a dagger. Cold-bloodedly murders him as a matter of fact!

 

Bringing this back up


l_n, I hope I know how to write Padmé. Perhaps by reading her positive characterisation in some of your fics, I could get a better idea of that. I definitely don't like to think of her as a pushover or an idiot at all. I mean, come on, she's Leia's mother!

Re: the thing about bad characterisation

It's not that I don't realise everyone has their own view on a character. My point is that, unless you're writing an AU, don't write it AU! And many AU's should still logically retain the same characterisations, just in different situations. I don't think it's unreasonable to say 'that was out of character for so and so' when it's clearly not something this character from the films would say or do under said circumstances. Grown men shouldn't act like teenage girls and vice versa. It just turns me off of a story when the characterisation aren't believeable. If there's a reason given and shown for why the character is behaving differently in a particular story, then that's completely fine. I just don't get it when people write Star Wars characters using things like phrases that are clearly Americanisms or Britishisms or whatnot. I'm sorry, I just don't see SW characters saying things like 'bummer', 'hell/heck yeah!', 'dude', 'blimey!', or any other clearly out of place slangs. And this is without even considering OOC mush, which I won't get into....

Ok, sorry, that was a rather random tangent from the topic at hand, wasn't it? I do have something to note, though. I'm in the planning stages of a story that's pretty severely AU and centered around Obi-Wan and Anakin... but get this- more centered around Anakin

*sees people fainting*

No, come back, I need your help I might need someone with another POV to look over that when I do start writing it or even perhaps once I get the outline of it completely hammered out, which I'm working on now.


Diane
Well I'm glad to know there are some other stories about Obi-Wan and the Dark Side, without just being Dark Obi. Might have to check those out. My point of view on it is that Obi-Wan can't claim to be a lightsider until he's actively resisted the Dark Side, which I do think we see him encountering in TPM. And it's something that he and everyone else would logically always be fighting, not just something they can avoid. He does almost let his aggravation with Dooku turn into anger, but you can tell he's also trying his hardest to reign it in, indicating to me that it's something he's faced before and knows better now how to resist.

-sj loves kevin spacey

 

DarthBreezy posted on 7/5/03/05 10:26am

---

Nice sharp title yes? Did it get a rise out of you? Do you feel angery when a character you love is written 'poorly'? Or extremly?

Are you guilty or writing characters like this? Anakin is either a saint or the devil incarnate. Obi-Wan is a brilliant long suffering master or an oaf...

Luke, Jedi Master or whiney farm boy?

Mara Jade, Loving wife or red scourge?*

[b]Edited to add[/b] This is just a partial list.. feel free to add characters that I missed... Qui Gon has been brought up and I think that's Brilliant!

I would have given this thread the [b]PROPER[/b] title of [i][b]Finding a Balance[/b][/i] but as the subject is so deeply based on individual perceptions and we tend to be so 'reactionary' when our beloved freinds are 'mistreated' I wanted the title to reflect that "gob-Smacked" feeling we get when this happens.

So, what it boils down to is this...

Are you guilty of pigeon holing a character? How? Why?

* I have NO knowlege of anything past ROTJ... I tried to read the EU but it just wasn't my cuppa, so pardon the ignorance!
[hr][/blockquote]


*Drags Breezy's wonderful thread up from the grave* Okay, Herman dragged it up....but anyway...[face_tongue]

Only a little over a month until ROTS and I'm sure much more discussion. I asked Herman to unlock because there is sure to be discussion on these two and other characters (Qui-Gon, Padme, Yoda, Luke, etc.) and to keep Breezy's theme of how we portray them based on how we feel about a certain character. (I think I got that right, Breezy, correct me if I'm wrong). They all have their own individual characterization threads (read: refuges, bunkers, you name it [face_grin]), but sometimes it's good to get everybody in the mix.

EDIT: gob-smacked?? I love that. [face_laugh]

 

Excellent topic...it's been really fun to read through here and see what ground has already been covered. I have a tendency to see Obi-Wan as the tragic hero of SW, but one whose flaws helped bring about the tragedy. If I lean towards the sainthood side of Obi-Wan it's because of my complete Cynical21 addiction! However, I'm willing to suspend my final judgment on the whole relationship until I see RTOS, because I think it will shed light on many things that can only be conjuctured at this point.

One thing that has come up in the discussion is Obi-Wan and Yoda's actions in ESB and RTOJ. How can Obi-Wan and Yoda have been right, and yet Luke right also? I think an existentialism point of view can help. We're studying Kierkegaard in my philsophy class and Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling suggests that the realm of faith lies beyond the realm of ethics.

From an ethical point of view, Obi-Wan and Yoda were right. There was no logical reason to believe there was anything of Anakin Skywalker left in Vader. Look at Vader through ANH and ESB. He's mostly a caricature of evil. In ESB, his offer to Luke reveals a fundamental tension between him and the Emperor, but wanting to kill one's Master seems to be typical of Sith.

Luke's belief, his faith perhaps, in his father's goodness is completely unjustified when he discusses the matter with Obi-Wan and Yoda. There is no logical reason to believe it. (There may be pyschological reasons, but those don't carry the same ethical weight). The first time we see even a glimmer of hope is the "It is too late for me, Son" line.

The trilogy is actually a good embodiment of Kierkegaard's stages of development. The first is hedonistic/aesthetic where one's live centers on immediate pleasures of the moment or an abstract world removed from reality. Luke's dissatisfaction with Tatooine and his fantasy of getting away may embody a bit of both.

Second stage is the ethical stage, where one accepts reality and chooses to do one's duty. The ethical stage is what Yoda is really trying to shape Luke into in ESB, someone who acts on univsersal standards, with the reality of the past and the future in mind. When Luke leaves for Bespin, Obi-Wan and Yoda fear he is regressing to the hedonistic state.

In actuality, Luke is taking his first clumsy steps to the third level, that of faith. Faith is having hope without reason for hope. Luke believes his father is good, but he can't prove it, or even make a decent argument: there are none. To the ethicist, Luke's actions are absurd. Faith is always absurd. There is always dread mixed with faith, because if the faith really is unjustified, then all there is is the ethical level, and by the ethical judgment, his actions are wrong. Imagine what the Alliance would have done if Vader hadn't saved Luke. They would have called him a traitor and and idiot, "He's dead. Good riddance!"

In the end, Luke's faith was justified. There was good in Vader, and the story ends happily. But only hindsight allows us to make that judgment. At the point at which Luke has his saber at Vader's throat and refuses to kill him, he's being ridiculous. Maybe he's even being wrong, if you consider all the lives Vader could have taken if he'd let the Emperor kill Luke. An ethical person, an Old Order Jedi Knight, would have sliced off Vader's head, calmly and dispassionately. Luke however, has faith, acts on it, and is operating at a completely different philosopical level than Yoda and Obi-Wan even thought possible. And maybe that was the biggest flaw of the Jedi order--they didn't believe there could be anything beyond the ethical.

Now, Kierkegaard was a devout Christian, and many of his ideas don't work as well without a Christian framework, but I think his ideas on faith fit pretty well. For a better description than mine, see these links to the Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and Wikipedia.

Kierkegaarde

[link=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/

 

Apparently I've killed this!

~Lurker