Why is Anakin classified as the hero of Star Wars?

Recently, I read in a forum (can't recall which one, sorry), that Mr. Lucas describes Anakin as a "tragic hero." I don't get it, and here's why:

A hero is based off of someone that is willing to sacrifice themselves for others. They can make mistakes, but are ultimately on the side of good.

A 'tragic hero' usually refers to someone who sacrifices themselves (either dying or harming themselves badly) for that good. Their actions are selfless, and although there might have been a better way, their contribution is an act or attempt of an act of bringing something positive to their society.

I don't understand how Anakin falls into these standards. I like the character, but mainly because his fallacies remind me of someone who is very human...but not a hero.

The only time I can recall Anakin performing a selfless act is in TPM, by pod-racing. But, in AotC, most of his actions are based either on protecting Padme (his love) or rescuing Obi-wan (his mentor).

Saving someone you care about it not a heroic act. It might be amazing and even brave, but it's based on your own selfish desire to keep someone you love out of harm's way.

When Vader saved Luke at the end of RotJ, it was not heroic. Rescuing your own child from torment and death is a very human act, but there isn't anything special about it--any parent with an ounce of credit would have done the same exact thing.

I've argued before that Vader isn't about evil--he's about order. He helps Palpatine strip the universe of its basic freedoms for the purpose of maintaining some type of order (which, if everyone is controlled ends up bringing peace).

Perhaps, in his own way, Vader was trying to be good in a very arrogant, distorted way.

But the only difference between being a hero and being a villain is this: do the ends justify the means? Whether or not the outcome is positive, if someone uses immoral means it is a villain. Just because I can feel sorry for him doesn't alter that fact--the best villains are ones you can pity to some extent.

So, why is Anakin classified as the hero of Star Wars by Lucas and so many others? I just can't get it.

{end of rant...for now}

 

Same reason Macbeth, King Lear and Othello are the heroes of the Shakespearean plays named after them.

He's a tragic hero - one you are meant to look at and say, "There but for the grace of god, go I."

A 'tragic hero' usually refers to someone who sacrifices themselves (either dying or harming themselves badly) for that good. Their actions are selfless, and although there might have been a better way, their contribution is an act or attempt of an act of bringing something positive to their society.

Sorry, that's not actually a tragic hero at all.

Tragic heroes are often the villains of their stories as well (ie Othello, Macbeth).

An "Aristotelian" tragic hero must have four characteristics: goodness, superiority (this can be in terms of politics, reputation, etc), a tragic flaw that eventually leads to his demise and a realization of both his flaw and his demise.

I think this fits Anakin fairly well.

 

"Hero" just means "the main male character." Macbeth, for example, displays almost no traditionally heroic traits yet he is the main protagonist of the play. Anakin is the main protagonist of Star Wars, so he is the "hero" in that sense. He is "tragic" because he has massive flaws that cause his downfall.

 

Macbeth, for example, displays almost no traditionally heroic traits yet he is the main protagonist of the play.

I disagree. Macbeth has many heroic traits. Heroism, devotion to duty, skill in battle.

I'm not sure where the "tragic heroes die for a noble cause" idea came from - Macbeth is killed in battle, Othello commits suicide after murdering his wife, and King Lear dies of a broken heart.

 

He's the main character of the series.

Luke is the hero of the series.

If Anakin hadn't been the anti-hero, he would never have been a father. Then the galaxy wouldn't have been saved by Luke and Leia, esp after the Vong Invasion.

 

Tragic heroes by their definition are good people who at some point encounter the evil prescene of fate in their lives. They may have deep personal faults, but that alone is NOT ENOUGH to make a tragic hero. Fate has to deal the character such a crappy blow it leaves them almost with no choice in the matter.

Othello would NOT have killed his wife if it hadn't been for the truly evil Iago conspiring to ruin his life.

Hamlet would NOT have embarked on his quest for vengence and accidentally murdered Peloneis had his Uncle not murdered his father and married his mother.

Willy Loman would NOT have commited suicide had he gotten a break in his business.

Oedipus would NOT have killed his father and married his mother had it not been for THEIR attempts to STOP the prophecy put into motion.

Anakin would NOT have fallen to the darkside had his mother not been brutally murdered or if the Jedi order rid itself several critical flaws (I won't say which because its a spoiler) or if the SITH MASTER of the galaxy didn't personally try to corrupt him.

Moreover, Anakin is redeemed by the love of his son, and PERSONALLY kills the Emperor. This fufills his destiny as the Chosen One. Which begs the question raised in Tatooine Ghost, would Anakin have been able to kill the most powerful Sith in 2,000 years had he not been a Sith Lord himself? Was it the will of the force for him to fall the whole time? Who can say?

So basically, your definition is wrong, and Lucas is right. Sorry.

When Episode III comes out, you can clearly see how much Anakin is like Othello and Hamlet specifically. Why I can't tell you.

 

I remember hearing Lucas speak once about how everyone assumes that Star Wars was supposed to be "Luke's story" based off of the OT, while Lucas himself saw it as "Anakin's/Vader's story." Episodes I through III are about Anakin's tragic fall into darkness, while Episodes IV through VI are about his "journey through Hell" (while under the influence of the Dark Side) and eventual redemption.

I personally think Anakin is a prime example of a tragic hero...unfortunately he had to go through a period of darkness to understand that true power comes from selfless love and mercy. Anakin gave of his own life to save another...someone he knew would always live a life in defense of what is good and righteous. It doesn't matter if that person was Anakin's own son. Anakin ended his life doing what was right for the Star Wars universe and died a hero.

 

The Whole Star Wars Saga is centered around the fall and the redemption of Anakin Skywalker. The circumstances surrounding his whole life, the things that led to his fall, the reason he returned to the light when it all came out. He's the center of the entire Star Wars universe. IE: the hero.

 

Gotta love that Wikipedia.

Okay, the arguments for this are really good. I decided to look up tragic hero myself, and to my surprise, that is the definition.

He must suffer
He must be doomed from the start
He must be fundamentally noble in nature
His story should arouse fear and pity
Though doomed, he must have free choice to some degree

Actually that sounds just about right, and characters like Othello, (probably the best Shakespeare next to R/J), do fit that role.

So, I will concede that Anakin falls under the terms for a tragic hero. Although I still argue that, while he is the main character in the prequels, he's not the main character in the classic trilogy. I have to wonder when Lucas stated that the entire thing was based off of Anakin--in 1998? 1999? I remember when he stated that he wanted to do Ep. IV, V, and VI first because he related to Luke the most. And, I still reiterate--"From the Adventures of Luke Skywalker." How I am supposed to not think that Lucas is contradicting himself?

And, what about Ep. VII, VIII, and VIII? He said he would never do them, but there were supposed to be three more episodes--so where does Anakin fall into that? Obviously, Anakin was not orignally the center of SW...and honestly, I wish he had kept it that way.

And, I still consider him a villain in the OT--he might be a tragic hero in the PT, but by the OT, I say he's assigned to villain qualities. It's been twenty years--when Othello killed his wife, it was an emotional, swift act. I will say that Vader is under the Emperor's influence, but some of the actions he performed by himself are too villain-ish, and it spans for years and years. It's not quite the same thing as one emotional action.

Luke, Han, and Leia are the actual heros of SW. And, I still believe that a father saving his son is not a heroic act. It was an excellent revelation (which the tragic hero is supposed to have), and wonderful redemption...but it's a human move, not a heroic one. I doubt he would have saved him if Luke weren't his own son. Vader and the Empire are supposed to kill a ton of Jedi--surely, those people were mighty good. So, I still can't agree to that.

 

Anakin is a tragic hero from any way you look at it. And he is so for two main reasons (which have nothing and everything to do with definitions).

1) Regardless of Wikipedia, et al (though they are correct), Lucas says Vader is the hero of the saga. trying to argue against that is like trying to argue there is no Dark Side. Oh, wait...

2) Anakin is a hero, in every sense of the word. It is Darth Vader who is the villain. From age 9 (8?), he knows what's right and what's wrong and believes only in helping people -- see: Jira, podracing, etc. However, even at that young age we see the seeds of his failure: his temper. He fights with a young Greedo out of anger for what he believes is a righteous cause.

That would be fine for Han Solo, but exceptionally dangerous for a Jedi. Unfortunately, he is the Chosen One, so a Jedi he must be (according to the Jedi). We all know that the Jedi of the Republic have strictures against attachment for the sake of the Jedi and that 99.44% of the Order follow them. The last two known instances of great love from the pre-Reformed Republic were Ulic Qel-Droma/Nomi Sunrider and Revan/Bastilla and I'm fairly certasin that no one will say that the Jedi Order had at least *some* good reason to try and prohibit attachment of that sort, considering the death tolls resulting from both of those loves were likely in the trillions. It's true that many unions in the past (pre-Reformation) worked out just fine, but in the grander scheme of things the bad cases were far worse on a cosmic scale than the positive aspects of the "good" cases. Then, we have the granddaddy of the "no attachment" rule: Anakin/Padme.

Anakin is a hero. Despite a reckless streak that likely comes from being young and human rather than anything else, he is probably the most pivotal Jedi of the Clone Wars. General, soldier, Jedi, leader, public face of the Jedi -- all of those apply. But he was also the mentee of Chancellor Palpatine and devoted husband to Padme Skywalker as well, which is where he takes a turn for the "tragic."

Anakin's only lapse as an adult Jedi came during his Padawan-ship, when he slaughtered the Tusken village over the death of his mother. If Yoda could feel that anger and hatred over a several light-year distance, it is EXTREMELY likely that the reigning Dark Lord of the Sith could feel it as well. Knowing that the seed was there and the triggers, is it any wonder that Palpatine would monitor Anakin and encourage him whenever he could? Flashback eight years from there on Zonoma Sekot -- didn't Anakin (as a child, and thus less in control) lash out with the Force and kill the Blood Carver in order to protect another? I believe there was a witness there as well, who likely reported back to Palpatine (I honestly do not recall the exact details of the scene, so it is possible I am off on this one). This is where Padme comes in...

Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. It's unclear what Padme's role in ROTS (nor is it approriate to speculate in here; too many opportunties for someone to confirm/deny spoilers), but we can *ASSUME* that Palpatine will use fear, anger and/or hatred in the service of the Dark Side by exploiting Anakin's deep, heartfelt love for Padme, his wife. Now, here's the interesting part: it is ENTIRELY possible that Anakin as we know him isn't Darth Vader. Without going into Labyrinth of Evil spoilers, they are setting up the General Grievous backstory in a way such that Anakin really is more of a hero than he was to begin with. Do we know that Anakin has some sort of lapse? We can certainly presume it. Do we know for certain that Anakin willingly became Darth Vader? This is LESS certain now and very much exists as a possibility that he DOES NOT. If so, that changes the very fabric of Star Wars existance for 22 years, when we got the "full" Darth Vader story from Ben Kenobi on Dagobah.

If Anakin was unwillingly turned into Darth Vader after his lapse by Darth Sidious, then consider this: for nothing more than t

 

Okay...according to your logic, if I do something horrible like murder someone--as long as I'm in a state of mind that's influenced by hate--it's not me, but Darth Niralle. Sorry--doesn't fly.

Anakin turns into Vader. He fell, and he embraced the dark-side, and it could have been from very human things (we'll have to watch RotS before anything's confirmed), but Anakin fell. This isn't a split personality--Vader's not insane. Vader is a dark-sided influenced version of Anakin. He's still responsible for his terrible actions.

Anakin isn't a hero. I'll concede to the tragic hero thing for the PT, but by OT, he's a villain.

You ever watch Spider-man 2? (watch it-spoilers) By your logic (just as an example), Doc Ock isn't the villain--he's the hero. He was influenced by dark-guidence, but his intentions were good, and in the end, Peter was the one to bring him back to the good side. I mean, it wasn't Peter who destroyed the machine--it was Ock. So, by that logic, shouldn't it be called, "Dr. Octapus," instead of "Spider-man"?

I'm not saying that Anakin didn't do good things during the PT, and especially the Clone Wars. But, I never see what he did during the Clone Wars--what I see is someone who, with the exception of pod-racing as a ten year old, did all his actions based on his own interests most of the time.

Don't misunderstand--most of the time, I can't blame him. Even when he slaughtered those Sand People, I felt bad for him, not the Raiders. But, like I said, that doesn't make him a hero.

ps...If Lucas said that Yoda was a Wookie, and Han Solo was a strang green alien, would that change what you've been made to believe? Lucas started this, "Anakin's the hero," crap about the same time the PT came out. It is not right to change the focus of a story that's been out for over twenty years just because you feel like it. Honestly, I think the man's gone senile.

 

Anakin does sacrifice himself for others.

In the end, he sacrifices himself to save the son that he barely knew but none the less loved. His final breaking of the Emperor's hold on him saved the galaxy.

Tragic hero is the perfect description for Anakin Skywalker.

--Adm. Nick

 

Okay...according to your logic, if I do something horrible like murder someone--as long as I'm in a state of mind that's influenced by hate--it's not me, but Darth Niralle. Sorry--doesn't fly.

We don't know the circumstances of Anakin's transformation to Darth Vader. All we have are Obi-Wan's recollections which may or may not be flawed.

All we know is Anakin (as Anakin) had two lapses in judgment (Zonoma Sekot and Tatooine) for which he was both scared adn remorseful. At some point later, he turns into Darth Vader and ceases his existance as Anakin Skywalker until he redeems himself.

Anakin turns into Vader. He fell, and he embraced the dark-side, and it could have been from very human things (we'll have to watch RotS before anything's confirmed), but Anakin fell. This isn't a split personality--Vader's not insane. Vader is a dark-sided influenced version of Anakin. He's still responsible for his terrible actions.

We don't KNOW this for certain. We only have Obi-Wan's word for it -- which, as you can imagine, might be flawed considering he also said that Darth Vader murdered Anakin. We know Anakin turns into Vader but we don't know if it is a willing transformation. Given the evidence in Labyrinth of Evil, it's more than possible that it was not willing in the sense that we have been led to believe over the last 22 years.

Anakin isn't a hero. I'll concede to the tragic hero thing for the PT, but by OT, he's a villain.

He may be a villain by the time he reaches the OT, but he is and was a hero of the Clone Wars and before.

You ever watch Spider-man 2? (watch it-spoilers) By your logic (just as an example), Doc Ock isn't the villain--he's the hero. He was influenced by dark-guidence, but his intentions were good, and in the end, Peter was the one to bring him back to the good side. I mean, it wasn't Peter who destroyed the machine--it was Ock. So, by that logic, shouldn't it be called, "Dr. Octapus," instead of "Spider-man"?

Nope. It's a movie about Spider-Man, hence the title. However, that doesn't make Doctor Octavius any less of a tragic hero either. He wasn't a hero BEFOREHAND, he was just a man with vision and good intentions. Anakin WAS a hero beforehand.

I'm not saying that Anakin didn't do good things during the PT, and especially the Clone Wars. But, I never see what he did during the Clone Wars--what I see is someone who, with the exception of pod-racing as a ten year old, did all his actions based on his own interests most of the time.

How can you possibly say that? Have you read any of the Clone Wars? Watched the cartoon? read any of the comics? He is plenty hero in those. Constantly on the front-lines of the Clone Wars fighting for the Republic against the Separatists.

Don't misunderstand--most of the time, I can't blame him. Even when he slaughtered those Sand People, I felt bad for him, not the Raiders. But, like I said, that doesn't make him a hero.

Clearly not. That was an obvious lapse as I said above.

ps...If Lucas said that Yoda was a Wookie, and Han Solo was a strang green alien, would that change what you've been made to believe? Lucas started this, "Anakin's the hero," crap about the same time the PT came out. It is not right to change the focus of a story that's been out for over twenty years just because you feel like it. Honestly, I think the man's gone senile.

Don't hate the playa, hate the game. What Lucas says, goes. Period. G-canon.

 

Trust me guys, you will see quite clearly in Episode III the reasons for Anakin's fall. He makes a deal with the devil to stop something, but gets nothing in return (non spoiler, this was in the Esquire article). Its even more tragic than Othello because like his 9 year old self, he's just trying to stop people from dying. There is also a critical flaw in the failing Jedi Order which the Sith exploit ruthlessly.

 

I agree, Tragic hero is the best way of refering to Anakin. He fits the meaning competely. Also I agree we DO NOT know the exact details of Anakin's fall. It might be another personality was created or not. Or that it was all Anakin or somthing else. We simply don't know. All we know is what Obiwan tells Luke and even that is questionable cause that was from Obiwan's certain point of view or he could have simply been telling Luke what he needed to hear at the time in order to complete his mission.

 

I believe GL was merely mentioning his villain/hero role in Starwars, in describing him as a "tragic hero". He already said in the new trilogy DVD commentary (special disk) that Luke Skywalker is the hero of Starwars. However, Anakin/Vader isn't entirely a villain because of his special purpose, the way he was twisted by Palpatine, and how it was all necessary for the sake of the galaxy, so he's neither a hero nor a villain. The best way to describe him is, a tragic hero.

All we know is what Obiwan tells Luke and even that is questionable cause that was from Obiwan's certain point of view or he could have simply been telling Luke what he needed to hear at the time in order to complete his mission.

That's questionable, since it's improbable for the man who was killed by Vader himself, and knows that he has been responsible for killing countless people, was bent on galactic domination, and was going to kill even more countless people, to think that he could be redeemed. They all tried, and knew it was impossible. It's why Luke's own determination to redeem Anakin, defying what Yoda and Obi-Wan said, and putting his life and the fate of the galaxy in the line, for the sole purpose to redeem him with his love, is the focal point and that, combined with Vader showing his own selfless love at last, ultimately, is a perfect example of what we come to know as the real secret of the force.

 

Wait a sec--are we taking the books, comics and cartoons as cannon? Because, according to Lucas, he doesn't consider them cannon. So, why should I take them as the real deal when the Almighty Lucas deems them not so?

How am I supposed to take the Creator's words as authentic when he continuously changes his mind on what he's doing? Contradictions flying all over the place.

As I've already stated, he already admitted that there were supposed to be 9 episodes. Clearly, Anakin Skywalker wouldn't have been the focus in the beginning--this is something new, probably because Lucas can't finish the tale (for various reasons).

Whatever Lucas says would go if he didn't back out and re-state everything he previously stated.

Oh, and dp4m, no malice--it's fun to debate with you. I just disagree.

 

He's not.

 

Because, according to Lucas, he doesn't consider them cannon.

Cannon go boom.

I'm sorry . . .

Oh, and I don't believe Lucas has ever said this, at least not since I've been paying attention. Quote?

 

He's vague on the whole thing, mainly because he doesn't really care.

 

Not only a hero, but incredibly, even a role model and deity to some people. Same for Organa Solo and that rogue Solo the ladies can't get enough of.

Then again, we have our Rugby, and we don't use padded protection over here. There's more to see . . .

When I finally beat Desann on hardest level, I'll be a hero and Dp4m's RPG didactics can jump.

 

Luke is the hero. So says Lucas.

 

Saving someone you care about it not a heroic act. It might be amazing and even brave, but it's based on your own selfish desire to keep someone you love out of harm's way.

That's silly thinking. It relies on the idea that somehow people will find more courage within themselves to save family and friends than they will for strangers. There's no real proof of that.A person may be just as cowardly when it comes to saving a family member or friend, their selfishness moving them to let them die so that they may preserve their own life.

Extremely backwards thinking. I mean, you overlooked all the other obvious evidence you could make a case against him being a hero with. How about the fact that he murdered millions, directly and indirectly? Children, adults, woman. He murdered them quite often just to make an example. He murdered just because a person made a mistake. He betrayed the Jedi Order and hunted them to extinction even their sole crime was ignorance.

Yet the first example you bring up is how selfish he was to save people close to him, and how that's not heroic.

The obvious argument, is that depite a few heroic acts, he is not much of a hero. Not to debate whether risking one's life for another is heroic or not.

Hmm.

 

Lucas says a lot of things. It's best to just ignore him most of the time.

 

Wait a sec--are we taking the books, comics and cartoons as cannon? Because, according to Lucas, he doesn't consider them cannon. So, why should I take them as the real deal when the Almighty Lucas deems them not so?

Firstly: [image=http://www.targetvision.com/ecc/images/cannon.jpg]

Secondly: under the Literature forum rules, you are required to. Secondly, there's not really a point to having this debate here instead of Saga or CT if you're not using EU sources.

How am I supposed to take the Creator's words as authentic when he continuously changes his mind on what he's doing? Contradictions flying all over the place.

Ironically enough, that's a charge leveled at the EU as well. Still, why shouldn't you take them at credit? If he says Grand Moff Tarkin is the hero of the Saga, then he's right in his mind at that time, which is good enough for me. Remember, even in SW the only real heroes of the saga are the droids--the only other 2 characters who appear in all 6 are Obi-Wan (who's dead in the last two and pretty manipulative anyway) and Anakin/Vader.

As I've already stated, he already admitted that there were supposed to be 9 episodes.

12, actually.

Clearly, Anakin Skywalker wouldn't have been the focus in the beginning--this is something new, probably because Lucas can't finish the tale (for various reasons).

Actually, I believe that Anakin (or whichever name GL was using) was always intended to be the main protagonist/hero of the saga.

Whatever Lucas says would go if he didn't back out and re-state everything he previously stated.

According to the people who actually manage SW continuity, they do go. Plus, why can't people change their minds?