696

what the fudge does abstinence have to do with being one with the light side? Like how does that even correlate? We need to stop retconning the canon to fit all that prequel nonsense into it all! I can’t even wrap my brain around any logic that shows Luke as being more morally gray than the jedi in the prequels.

I remember back in freshman year of college when I first saw a poster for Attack of the Clones with the tagline “For Jedi love is forbidden” or something like that, and all the warning sirens went off in my head. I was PISSED, and I’m still pissed! Because with that single poster I completely lost the idea of what Jedi were. I’d associated them with open mindedness, empathy, compassion, and fighting for ideals above all. Then suddenly they were close minded, emotionally repressed religious fanatics who follow traditions that go against their own best interests.

Literally everything we learn about Jedi in the OT is contradicted by the prequel films to the point where the definition of Jedi just 180 degree flips between trilogies. They might as well be called Jodi or something entirely different in the prequels. I honestly think Jedi abstinence was worse than midichlorians and the virgin birth in terms of murdering the whole logic of the SW universe. Why did Lucas become so obsessed with the Christian idea of purity to represent the Jedi when he claims to be Buddhist (which I assume is his shorthand for ‘atheist/agnostic’)?

I mean I’ve heard that justification before, but that is imposing a narrative onto the films that is never stated. At no point to Yoda or Obiwan show any remorse about the direction the Jedi Order had taken. In fact, Obiwan seems to be very wistful and nostalgic for it. This indicates, at least in the original films, that the Jedi were wiped out unjustly, and re-establishing the Jedi through Luke is a means of returning a force of good to the galaxy.

A quick reminder that in the OT Yoda asked Luke to let his sister and best friend die because he’s not ready to block off his emotions yet. So no, I neither think that Yoda or Obi-Wan “learned their lesson”, nor do I see a contradiction. It’s simply that with the very little that they teach of the force, it’s not immediately obvious that they’re against the whole emotions thing.

Heck, Obi-Wan explicitly lies to Luke about his father. He makes that “perspective” excuse, but if you really think about it, and about what he and Yoda say afterwards, it seems like it’s more their goal for Luke to kill Vader, but not feel any anger during it, or guilt afterwards. Basically, they think proper Jedi should be Terminators. Emotionless killing machines.

It’s Luke who decides that his father can be redeemed, and that this is a worthy venue to seek, despite the risks. He says he is a Jedi for refusing to kill his father at the emperor’s behest. But, in fact, Yoda and Obi-Wan had also asked him to kill his father. So, in effect, at that point, he had already become something that is neither Sith nor Jedi.

Luke had foreseen what would happen if he didn’t go to Bespin. Yoda’s foresight had been blinded for a while, at that point, and he had no reason to doubt Luke’s prescience. He wasn’t worried that Luke would face Vader and lose, he was worried that he’d face Vader, win, but then become like Vader in the process. And, to him, a few lives sacrificed is worth the price.

Ultimately, Luke’s decision to go was correct in that case. Not only did he give the others the chance to escape, him losing his hand and learning the truth in his fight with Vader, would ultimately allow him to understand why his own face was behind the mask in the cave. And that resulted in the catharsis in the end of ep6.

Also, Luke bringing his light saber wasn’t the ONLY reason he failed the cave. It was just one factor. It’s not as if coming in unarmed would have prevented him from seeing his doppleganger. It was his own hate towards a person whom he believed killed his father, and who killed his father-figure mentor. Obi-Wan had a lot to do with nurturing that hate.

Ultimately, the ideology of the Jedi has always boiled down to “fear is the path to the dark side”. Yoda may exhibit knowledge and understanding, Obi-Wan did some “non-aggression” in his self-sacrifice, and I’m not sure where you got “critical thinking” from, but it’s still down to removing all fear. And not in the Dune “I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me” way.

Also, didn’t you just earlier say that you liked Star Wars because the villains aren’t evil for the sake of being evil? Yes, the opening narration isn’t afraid to say “The evil galactic empire”. But then, a removed scene had Luke considering joining the empire as a pilot. I’ve seen overly naive light vs dark stuff, and Star Wars, thankfully, isn’t it.
Plus, I have to give it to Lucas for making a Lawful Evil character likeable. Especially when, in my personal experience, Lawful Evil are the worst kind of people. I think the fact that he never pats himself on the back for a job well done factors well into this.

Luke certainly didn’t foresee what would happen if he went to Bespin, but he did have a vision of what would happen if he DIDN’T. I guess whether his presence there was useful or not is up for debate. But I don’t think they’d have made the getaway they have without Luke’s help.
Yoda’s statement pretty much echos the same sentiment. It can be rephrased as “You’d save them, but not what they fight for”. It’s not that Yoda suspects a trap or a failure. It’s just that he expects saving Leia and the others to come at a cost. And again, by his own testament, he’s still partially force-blind, although I suppose you could re-interpret it as “No one can see the future” if you don’t take the emperor’s prescience in RotJ as canon.

I’m not sure if what Yoda suggests qualifies as “think clearly, and you’ll find the best course of action”. It’s more along the lines of “greater good”.

Also, I have to disagree with your view of ANH. While Tarkan is clearly all about extreme hubris and showing off his power, Vader actually stands in somewhat of a contrast to that. He’s already a lawful evil character, giving the vibe of “I don’t enjoy torture and killing. I do what I must. I do as I’m told”. Less so on the latter part, when he gives lines like “Do not overestimate the technological terror you’ve constructed”, or “The force is strong with this one”. He never underestimates his opponents.

In fact, lack of hubris, gloating, and self-righteousness is what makes Vader unique as a lawful evil character. A classical lawful evil would usually refuse to assert that anything they do is not the absolute most correct and right and moral thing to do. While ANH is too early to give Vader an air of self-hate as the prequels would later imply that he should have, it does give him an air of “I get the job done”. Even before he starts choking people from across space, he already warns his partners not to go half-hearted into what he already realizes is a war proper.

So, while Tarkan is a clear black, killing millions just to make a demonstration, Vader is not so clear cut. His motive is to stop a leak and prevent harm to his side. Maybe not noble, consider what side he’s on, but certainly not different from what anyone else would do for the side that they are on.
Also, the way he follows Tarkan’s orders, but still gets free motion when he’s not around, makes him look less like “Evil henchman” and more like “mercenary”. If anything, by giving him a position of command, ESB ruins his unique position of seeming like an outsider compared to the rest of the imperial army.

As for the emperor, he’s a more clear black, wanting absolute power, and not thinking twice about replacing his most loyal vassal. But that doesn’t strictly contradict anything previously established. The emperor is not Vader. Treating them as having the same moral compass is a mistake, especially after Vader suggests a coup in ESB.
I don’t see a “moral flip-flop” like you do. I see a set of villains that, unlike cartoon villains, are not a morally uniform mesh, but rather, consists of different people with different moral views.
Now, perhaps Vader’s Heel-Face turn kind of spoils that, since you can argue “Oh, but this one wasn’t REALLY a villain”, but it still counts for a message of “Don’t see your enemies simply as a monster to be vanquished”.

yeah, Jedi in the OT are definitely very Buddhist. Granted they are ACTUALLY in a universe where staying calm and at peace allows them to better tap into the guidance of the Force. And it is true that being overly jubilant about something, or passionately loving something or someone could blind you to certain faults or problems. This is obviously me extrapolating, but I’d like to think that Jedi philosophy isn’t the suppression of emotions good or bad, but a temperance of emotions so they don’t control your actions. Losing control to your extreme emotion when you have the potential of the Force at your fingertips isn’t just a matter of preference when you’re a Jedi, it’s common sense and practicality.

Yeah, the Jedi Code, which was added to the EU post prequels. You’d figure the Jedi Code would be, like, a very succinct instruction booklet, not a vaguely worded poem. They’re an order of knights with a code of conduct, appointed to defend those in need, or at least that’s what I thought they were until we found out they were a weird, backwards religious cult.