Why Vader blocks Luke's strike against the Emperor

The previous thread for this -- as listed in the CT thread index -- has been locked, so I've started a new one here. In any case, since discussion of this event must now involve PT events and characters, it makes sense to have it in Saga.

It occurs to me that there is a very simple explanation for Vader's defensive move to protect the Emperor from Luke's saber strike onbaord the DS2: In order to become the Sith Master and replace Palpatine as Emperor of the Galaxy, he, Vader, must deal the killing blow. As Darth Sidious slew Darth Plagueis and so became Master, so Vader must slay Sidious. If Luke were to do it, especially at the time he essays to do so (which see below), Vader would not become Master, and his plan to "rule the Galaxy as father and son" would fail.

Further, Vader's protective move is colored by his understanding that Luke is not yet ready to become a Sith Lord. Anakin himself required many steps along his path to the dark side -- the Tusken slaughter, Dooku's execution, and Windu's defeat being the key points of development. A single attack by Luke would not complete his dark journey, despite the Emperor's insistence on that point. Thus Vader, in defending the Emperor from Luke's strike, is merely biding his time until 1) Luke is psychologically ready to turn, and 2) Vader himself can deliver the killing blow against the Emperor.

What say you?

 

Interesting.

Personally, I think it was to protect Luke, not the Emperor.

With the character of Palpatine/Sidious having been fleshed out in the PT, it seems odd that he somehow expected to be struck down by Luke and would consider that a victory. I think Vader knows, even if he didn't step in, that any attack by Luke on Palpatine would be stopped and Luke would suffer. I guess there could be some selfish motivation there too, because if Vader did not intervene and Palpatine succesfully stopped Luke's attack, Palpatine could say: "So you didn't try and defend me. Some loyal servant you turned out to be" before frying Vader and defeating Luke.

Also, whilst I like the idea that you present of Vader thinking Luke wasn't ready to be a Sith Lord, I think it really doesn't matter. It's firmly established that there is no honour among Sith so I don't think it matters who strikes the Master down. If Luke struck down Palpatine and Vader strikes down Luke, Vader will still be the Master.

 

I agree that Vader must know that the Emperor would stop the blow himself if Vader did not move to protect him. But this also ties in with my observation about Luke not yet being ready to turn to the dark side. Vader would hate to see Luke destroyed before the plan to apprentice him came to fruition. It's a multi-layer moment.

Your second point, however, is not fully logical within the Rule of Two context, or within the context of Vader's offer to Luke to "rule the Galaxy as father and son". Vader wants Luke as his apprentice, not to destroy him.

 

Aw, shoot. Yes, I had forgotten that. It makes sense that Vader wants to stop Luke from becoming the Sith Lord by killing Palpatine and forcing Vader into a situation he wishes to avoid. Vader also want to stop Luke from becoming crippled like him, because that's what he would become if he attacked Palpatine alone. Like Palpatine, Vader wants his apprentice to be whole and at his full capacity.

So yeah, ignore my second point.

 

i think the rule of two is negligible, nothing too relevant at any rate because none of the sith ever seems to pay too much attention to it; at any rate it's a normal relationship for the jedi as well, master and apprentice.

vader blocks luke because it is his duty. or he feels it is his duty. they are teasing luke to draw out his anger and frustrating him is part of it.

 

There is a thought that has been expressed here before that Palpatine would have allowed himself to be killed by Luke if it meant turning Luke to the Darkside. The same for vader. It did not matter that they lived or died so long as the legacy of the Sith continued.

Palpatine and Vader trying to figure out how to chest death as introduced in the prequals changes that, but only slightly.

I think Vader stops Luke without the expectation that Luke would actually kill him. He thought it possible of course. But I think what he was shooting for was a simple kneel and swearing of allegience.

It was a pity, almost, he couldn't let the boy kill the Emperor yet. Luke wasn't ready for that, emotionally. There was still a chance Luke woudl return to his friends if he destroyed the Emperor now. he needed more extensive tutalage, first-training by both Vader and Palaptine, before he'd be able to assume his place at vader's right hand, ruling the galaxy

That last part almost hints that no one has to die during this battle, but that someone surely would later. More:

So Vader had to Shepherd the boy through periods like this, stop him from doing damage in the wrong places-or in the right places prematurely.

Of course this is th enovelization and a slight grain of salt shoudl go with using it, in the beginning it says the parent world of Endor was gone in some ancient past, but there it is on screeenin the background of the film.

The point is, Vader could have killed Palaptine with Lue looking on, or it could have been Luke killing Palpatine, or the two of them together.

 

I tend to concur with everything VadersLament posted, above. The quote from the novelization, below, sums up my observations nicely:

I've not read James Kahn's adaptation in over twenty years, but it's possible that passage unconsciously colored my perceptions, because it uncannily states my exact idea/realization/revelation.

______________________________________________________________________________________________

Sidious "paid attention to the rule" when he slew Darth Plagueis the Wise. Vader is paying attention to it when he tells Luke he can destroy the Emperor, and invites Luke to join him and "rule the galaxy as father and son". I agree that part of Vader's motivation in blocking Luke's blow is that he is "doing his duty" -- it would look awfully bad if he just waited for Palpatine to whip out the blue lightning to strike Luke down -- but in order to reconcile the offer Vader makes to Luke in ESB -- which is blatantly treasonous, blatantly rebellious against the Emperor's rule -- we must explain Vader's motives beyond simply "doing his duty".

 

Let's hit this facet then. Luke stabs at the Emperor, Palpatine stops it, then blasts Luke. Vader either let's Palps kill Luke, leaving him in the same servant mode he is in, or he must take that moment to kill Palaptine. If he kills Palps he would still have his lightside son to deal with. He must move Luke along, he has no real choice.

Both Vader and Palpatine relize this, hence the both of them talk to Luke throughout the entire encounter. This stresses that Sith must be planners. Vader wants to take Palpatine's place, Palaptine wants to remain. They will at some point try to kill each other. Luke is a tool in between them. Vader wnats Luke as his servant, Palaptine wants Luke as his servant. Both Vader and Palapatine knw the other wants to take Luke as his servant and replace the other yet they continue on all the same.

Congrats on your modship Vort.

 

VadersLament, I agree 100%.

 

I agree too.

 

Even though Vader asks Luke to join him and defeat the Emperor in Empire, I don't think that Vader was necessarily definitely ready to pull the trigger on the whole thing yet. If you take the dramatic moment where Vader is looking back and forth between Luke and the Emperor at face value, I think you have to conclude that Luke's calling out for his father to help him was the thing that pushed him over, and that Vader was still unsure right up until the moment he grabs the Emperor.

When Vader blocks Luke's blow to the Emperor, I believe he was doing it because he was protecting his master. He hadn't turned yet.

 

I know the book says Vader still plans on converting his son as in Empire, but the movie seems to really go out of its way to de-emphasize that whole thing. It's almost like in between movies, even as Luke has grown stronger, Vader has grown weaker, having failed to recruit his son, he has resigned himself to being a loyal Darth Maul-style guard dog.

 

your points are well taken. after all some time ago i've seen the films and there were practically only ever two siths about except when there were three and some quick beheading happening, so yes, there COULD be a rule of two. however, as you might have noticed, it's not an explicit rule and there's no way to argue that sidious branch of sithism (and who knows what tradition he is following) is not going to branch out into a dynasty itself, as with the jedi. at the moment your neat argument rests on conjecture (i think that is the word) and incident. and the words of a jedi, who know jack about the sith anyway.

vader by the time luke meets him in ROTJ has given up being a sole ruler (or rule of two ruler or father and son ruler) or anything but palps' servant. hence his refusal to leave with luke, maybe you forgot. therefore it is not unnatural to assume that he went along with the 'teasing' because it was his duty.

 

How would Palpatine stopped Luke's blow, though? The saber gets really close and he doesn't even flinch. Yes, Palpatine is fast, but that fast? It's as if he knew Vader wouldn't let him die (which seems odd, since an apprentice must inevidably kill the master).

 

You guys are reading too much into what is essentially a misguided retcon of Lucas and Kasdan's. While the ESB Vader was indeed a dynamic creature with imperial ambitions, the (filmic) ROTJ Vader is a golem. It's stated outright: "You don't know the power of the Dark Side. I must obey my Master." There's nothing coded in this: he's a slave. Simple as that.

Why else would Vader stand around like an idiot while Palps was playing Electro with his son, if not to agonize over allegiances?

 

So your saying that Palpatine has robbed him of a certain measure of free will? What about his line to Luke in ESB about over throwing the Emporer?

 

Luke refused that offer, (and that was when Luke was at his most vulnerable point) and didn't seem likely to ever accept it. Going strictly by the movie, Vader seems to have given up on that.

 

In fact, Luke tries to convince Vader to come with him on Endor, and Vader refuses. So things definitely changed between films.

 

I disagree that by ROTJ Vader has given up on taking Luke as his apprentice/co-ruler. Vader's suggestion in ESB that Luke be turned to the dark side is being pursued by the Emperor with gusto; if there is some possibility that Luke can be turned, there is every reason to believe that Vader can make use of it and continue to pursue his own aspirations.

But Luke is making light-side overtures to Vader, trying to speak to the good inside his father, not saying he wants to be Vader's darkside apprentice. Vader's agenda at this point is pure darkside; of course he refuses Luke's offer.

 

I'm saying it's a retcon. Lucas tore to tatters the internal logic of the first two films to suit his half-baked redemption story. Let's take a cursory view of Vader's arc:

ROTS: Anakin succumbs. In his intoxication, he reveals to his wife that he has eyes on the Throne. Sadly, he's reduced to a husk, and so goes his coup. What's more, he believes himself responsible for the deaths of his wife and child(ren). He has nothing left to live for. Anakin dies, leaving Vader to tether himself to Palpatine and embrace the golem role. He is truly "more machine now than man."

ANH: Palpatine gives Golem Vader a biscuit and whisks him to the Death Star, as a failsafe in case Tarkin decides to test the weapon on, say, Coruscant. Golem Vader serves his Master well (notwithstanding that oopsie in the trench).

Interim: Golem Vader discovers his Angel had a son. And he's alive. Golem Vader is mortally wounded; Anakin begins to reemerge. The result is Dynamic Vader--who naturally hatches a plot against Palps.

TESB: Dynamic Vader hunts down his son and promises him the galaxy. Luke opts for suicide. Dynamic Vader takes this to heart, evidenced by him sparing Piett. The armor chinks ever more. Ani's coming through.

(Now, you'd be forgiven for anticipating a mammoth power struggle to ensue between Palps and Vader--not only for the boy's soul but for the Empire. After all, there is more of Anakin, not less. But here's where things go askew.)

ROTJ: Lucas and Kasdan wait for Dynamic Vader in his meditation chamber and bludgeon him over his bare noggin', transmuting him into Slightly-Conflicted Golem Vader. Slightly-Conflicted Golem Vader still pursues Luke, but this time as an errand boy. He laments the power of the Dark Side ("It's too late for me, son."), but has lost the initiative to destroy the source of his misery. (Seeing as how he blocks Luke's strike and actually takes thirty or forty seconds to deliberate whether he should save his own son from Electro the Magnificent.)

It doesn't make a lick of sense. Apparently, Gary Kurtz was flummoxed too.

The one story thread that got totally tossed out the window, which was really pretty important I think, was the one of Vader trying to convince Luke to join him to overthrow the Emperor. That together they had enough power that they could do that, and it wasn't him saying I want to take over the world and be the evil leader, it was that transition. It was Vader saying, "I'm looking again at what I've done and where my life has gone and who I've served and, very much in the Samurai tradition, and saying if I can join forces with my son, who is just as strong as I am, that maybe we can make some amends."

http://www.filmthreat.com/index.php?section=interviews&Id=8

 

So your saying that Palpatine has robbed him of a certain measure of free will? What about his line to Luke in ESB about over throwing the Emporer?

"It is too late for me Son," means he does not see himself turning to the light. His line in TESB stands as consistant as he is talking about Luke coming to the Darkside and ruling the galaxy as evil.

TESB: Dynamic Vader hunts down his son and promises him the galaxy. Luke opts for suicide. Dynamic Vader takes this to heart, evidenced by him sparing Piett. The armor chinks ever more. Ani's coming through.


No. Piett was spared because it was not his fault the Falcon got away.

ROTJ: Lucas and Kasdan wait for Dynamic Vader in his meditation chamber and bludgeon him over his bare noggin', transmuting him into Slightly-Conflicted Golem Vader. Slightly-Conflicted Golem Vader still pursues Luke, but this time as an errand boy. He laments the power of the Dark Side ("It's too late for me, son."), but has lost the initiative to destroy the source of his misery. (Seeing as how he blocks Luke's strike and actually takes thirty or forty seconds to deliberate whether he should save his own son from Electro the Magnificent.)

It doesn't make a lick of sense. Apparently, Gary Kurtz was flummoxed too.

The one story thread that got totally tossed out the window, which was really pretty important I think, was the one of Vader trying to convince Luke to join him to overthrow the Emperor. That together they had enough power that they could do that, and it wasn't him saying I want to take over the world and be the evil leader, it was that transition. It was Vader saying, "I'm looking again at what I've done and where my life has gone and who I've served and, very much in the Samurai tradition, and saying if I can join forces with my son, who is just as strong as I am, that maybe we can make some amends."


"There is no conflict." This line is a true one. There is a moment in ROTJ in which after Luke is taken away Vader is alone and seems to reflect or consider. He may be considering that he was once good, as the novel indicates. But there is no attempt here on Vader's part to look to the lightside. He blocks Luke's saber for the reasons given above, to make Luke angrier or feel more lost. He was not ready yet, he needed to cook for a bit longer. It is only, only when Luke is not only being blasted by Palps but is in fact still calling for his father's help that Vader relizes there is indeed one person in the entire Universe who has a measure of unconditional love for one who commited so much evil and here he acts upon it. he could have killed Palps and then remained on the Darkside, but there was some good there and it chose that time to come forth. Luke was right.

There is no retcon here. There may have been some original story line that shows Vader not to be the figure of redemption, but that is not what we get when looking at the film. How to you retcon something that is not yet presented in the first place?

And let's look at this again:

The one story thread that got totally tossed out the window, which was really pretty important I think, was the one of Vader trying to convince Luke to join him to overthrow the Emperor.

Tossed out the window? This is exactly what was taking place right up until Luke kicked Vader's ass.

 

Yes! Yes! To VadersLaMent you listen!

 

Since it DID make it into the novel, I guess it was still intended to be true, but the movie really needed to reiterate it. Empire was 3 years earlier and it was one line, which came after the shock of I am your father. I've watched Empire with people and when Vader says "We can destroy the emperor as father and son..." they say "I totally forgot about that."
I know there was a cut scene at the beginning in which Vader telepathically contacts Luke (you can hear the music on the soundtrack), if that scene refers to it, they REALLY need to put that back in. (check out the toy "recreation" of an earlier version that scene to hear the music here!:
http://www.starwarz.com/tbone/index.php?categoryid=11&p2_articleid=428

 

It's not consistent. Note the disparity between the ESB proclamation "If you only knew the POWER of the Dark Side!" with the ROTJ lamentation, "You don't KNOW the power of the Dark Side." The former is euphoric, as Vader is beholden to the Dark Side and wants Luke to share in it; the latter denotes despair.

Entirely different character with entirely different motivations.

Which implies Anakin is in fact emerging. Does the ESB Vader strike you as the kind of fellow who'd mull over Piett's complicity? "Don't fail me again...Admiral!" is a pretty stark warning.

The retcon to which Kurtz referred was stripping Vader of his imperial ambitions. The ESB (and ROTS) Vader harbored them; his character was a backstabber. As Kurtz indicated, this was to have profound implications in ROTJ. But that didn't prove to be the case, as the ROTJ Vader was nothing but a slave.

That's called a retcon.

 

I see what you're saying, drg4, but by that logic, you're saying Anakin was not meant to be redeemed when GL wrote TESB, right?