Chefelf.com Night Life: Emergency Powers to Palpatine - Chefelf.com Night Life

Jump to content

Star Wars Fan Convention

  • (3 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Emergency Powers to Palpatine Emergenc Powers

#16 User is offline   civilian_number_two Icon

  • Canada's Next Top Model.
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Head Moderator
  • Posts: 3,382
  • Joined: 01-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In Your Dreams
  • Interests:I like stuff.
  • Country:Canada

Posted 13 November 2003 - 12:27 AM

"Lucas started Star Wars with a good deal of research and a well thought out background that drew from many areas. I have no explaination for why he did not stay with this for the prequels other than an apparent change in personal perceptions and a slightly more jaded personal world view that he seemed to want to include in these films. There is no doubt that the inclusion of these concepts in the prequels has damaged to overall continuity and even some of the romance and mysticism of the later films. Quite simply it's a tragedy."

You display a lot of faith in Lucas here. I think Lucas made the first STAR WARS movie with little to no research. It's easy for him to say that the Force is grounded in eastern philosophies and religion. He based his Jedi on Samurai warriors, and they are based in eartern philosphy and religion. Specifically, the Samurai warriors he saw in the movies he was forced to watch in film school. Specifically, he based them on the Samurai of Kuraswa's HIDDEN FORTESS, which, along with Frank Herberts' DUNE, was the basis for STAR WARS.

STAR WARS is a pastcihe of other ideas, and that's why it works. What happened to Lucas, you ask? He stopped watching movies for plots to steal, and started writing his own stories. That worked fine with AMERICAN GRAFFITI, since American car culture of the early 60's he understood and reminiscing about it was something he enjoyed. These new STAR WARS movies, I reckon, are bringing Lucas no joy at all, only money.

Mike.
"I had a lot of different ideas. At one point, Luke, Leia and Ben were all going to be little people, and we did screen tests to see if we could do that." -George Lucas, in STAR WARS: the Annotated Screenplays (p197).
0

#17 User is offline   Supes Icon

  • Sunshine Superman
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,334
  • Joined: 30-October 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Country:Australia

Posted 13 November 2003 - 12:51 AM

QUOTE (civilian_number_two @ Nov 13 2003, 12:27 AM)
You display a lot of faith in Lucas here. I think Lucas made the first STAR WARS movie with little to no research. It's easy for him to say that the Force is grounded in eastern philosophies and religion. He based his Jedi on Samurai warriors, and they are based in eartern philosphy and religion. Specifically, the Samurai warriors he saw in the movies he was forced to watch in film school. Specifically, he based them on the Samurai of Kuraswa's HIDDEN FORTESS, which, along with Frank Herberts' DUNE, was the basis for STAR WARS.

A point well made. The flaw in my argument is that it is based in self reporting from Lucas regarding the "research" that he did. I certainly can't claim to have checked this in any great detail beyond this.

I certainly wont argue the point about Lucas only doing it for the money now. His cynical disposition drips through these latest movies. As far as faith goes in Lucas - this is something that I simply do not have. The third movie will be the first one that I do not see on opening night. I just cannot do it to myself. I'll see the film, but I wont go in the first week as I refuse to contribute to the record breaking box office figures that will still likely result for this last installment. I may even end up waiting until it comes out on DVD.
Luminous beings are we... not this crude matter.
Yoda
0

#18 User is offline   civilian_number_two Icon

  • Canada's Next Top Model.
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Head Moderator
  • Posts: 3,382
  • Joined: 01-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In Your Dreams
  • Interests:I like stuff.
  • Country:Canada

Posted 13 November 2003 - 03:57 AM

I'll top that: I won't ever see it!

PHANTOM MENACE was the last STAR WARS film I saw, and I saw it on opening day. I saw it second time only because the secon-run theatre I was co-managing booked it, and I could see it for free.

I only have it on the good authoriy of you people and everyone else I have ever spoken to in my life that AOTC is terrible; I will never see it for myself.

Mike.
"I had a lot of different ideas. At one point, Luke, Leia and Ben were all going to be little people, and we did screen tests to see if we could do that." -George Lucas, in STAR WARS: the Annotated Screenplays (p197).
0

#19 User is offline   barend Icon

  • Anchor Head Anchor Man
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Crappy News Team
  • Posts: 11,839
  • Joined: 12-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nieuw Holland
  • Interests:The Beers of Western Europe, Cognac, and constantly claiming the world would have been a better place if Napoleon had won.
  • Country:Australia

Posted 13 November 2003 - 06:06 PM

AFter PHantom Menace, i gave up on LucASS!!!
i saw the Special Editions and realized they were "special" in a Timmy from South Park kind of a way, and it gave me a real omminous feeling about the, then upcomming, prequels. The title 'Phantom Menace' didn't exactly fill me awe either.
i mean these titles are awful. they sound like 50s/60s shclock horror films like 'robot monster' and 'Dr.Satans Robot'. I think the third one will be called. 'they came from outer space'

the only reason i went to see Ep2 was because Christopher Lee was in it! that's it.
and that, unfortunatley, is why i'll have to go see Ep3.
Mr.Lee in a film guarentees my showing up to any film.
0

#20 User is offline   dimmu borgir Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 13-November 03

Post icon  Posted 13 November 2003 - 06:26 PM

QUOTE (Daniel @ Oct 30 2003, 06:13 PM)
I still think by far the dumbest part of Ep. II is the idea that the Senate would rather make Palpatine an Emperor right off the bat, than approve the damn clone army. Yes of course this is incredibly believable if you think that count Dooku is right and Palpatine is controlling the entire senate, sure of course. But come on, if palpatine was using so much power wouldn't the jedi feel it? The force now seems to have an on / off switch, the Jedi can't use the force any more, so i guess the sith must have found the damn switch. Yoda states in the scene with Samuel L. Jackson (never can remember his jedi name) that their ability to use the force has diminished. Then how can Yoda lift a 4 ton piece of metal, and do all the other things? I mean, if the force is some cell parasite of some kind, how can you stop having it, you can't, did they somehow dissapear. If Lucas had left the Force as a mystical thing, then you could explain it, but with the med. explanation, it's just toooooo horrible. Lucas keeps messing up and trying to fix it by putting things in that are considered cool, like the yoda fight sequence, but these things do wonders to mess up the saga.

I think what everybody is missing here is that Lucas is simply pissy about the fact that many authors out there who have contributed wonderfully to the SW universe (Timothy Zahn and Barbera Hambley, to name a few) have proven to be far better writers than he himself ever did. Which is ironic, considering that each author had to sign an agreement to stick close to the stringent guidelines that GL himself set up concerning SW. The last two prequels are, in fact, a really sad attempt to compete with the actual talent that is out there. One more thing; SW is no longer really "his." It is ours: yours, mine, everybody's. He gave those exclusive rights up long ago when he agreed to have others expand upon his universe. And they have done a far better job than he could have ever hoped to do. So, in effect, he has not really trashed and bastardized in the worst way, his story; he has trashed all of ours. :angry: :angry: :angry:
0

#21 User is offline   Trouble Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 04-November 03

Posted 15 November 2003 - 09:13 AM

I wish I'd gotten more into the Star Wars RPG (first ed, not D20). I've heard so many good stories from people who played it. I don't know anyone who played it after PM.

This relates back to the "it's our story" idea. Between Galaxies and the RPG, a lot of people are "rewriting" Star Wars in their own image, and with their own ideas and ideals.

That being said, to relate this to the whole "pull a Vader" and save the triology thread, it would be interesting to have the Jedi council realize that these medicholrians are meaningless, and go back to the spiritual ideas that are brought out in the original. They lose everything, and in losing it all realize the truth.

Now I'm rambling. Forgive me, i''s late...

Trouble
0

#22 User is offline   rogue_scholar Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 12-November 03

Posted 15 November 2003 - 02:48 PM

QUOTE (Ninja Duck @ Nov 12 2003, 10:02 PM)
That's what I don't get, about the faith. How could Jedi lose faith in something they know works, something they've seen, and something they've used? If the Jedi don't want the force to go away, the could just believe in it more or something. And wouldn't a Jedi's ability to use the force depend on his individual faith, rather than the collective faith of a group? If it was collective, everyone could use the force equally...

Yes and no, Ninja Duck. That would all depend upon what phase in the cycle of things each side of the conflict found themselves in (if you can understand what I mean). You see, the Sith are at a phase when things are supposed to be working in their favor, thus the Jedi's ability to use the Force diminishing and the Sith's seeming invincibility in the face of the Jedi (which is also why Count Dookoo says to Darth Sidious, "The Force is with us, Master.")

At the time of "A New Hope" the pendulum is swinging the other way, which is why Luke is able to triumph over the forces of evil.
0

#23 User is offline   civilian_number_two Icon

  • Canada's Next Top Model.
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Head Moderator
  • Posts: 3,382
  • Joined: 01-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In Your Dreams
  • Interests:I like stuff.
  • Country:Canada

Posted 15 November 2003 - 07:49 PM

"At the time of "A New Hope" the pendulum is swinging the other way, which is why Luke is able to triumph over the forces of evil. "

Rogue Scholar,

Congratulations. Your explanation of the vagaries of the Force sounds almost like Lucas himself might have written it. With no ill will toward you, I should point out that I think this is a bad thing, since in my opinion Lucas has not been involved with anything good since the third INDIANA JONES film (and even there, just barely). In your scenario, there is no place for Free Will. In my understanding of the original STAR WARS trilogy, Luke Skywalker triumphed because he was brave and strong-willed and just a genuine good guy who would not turn his back on his friends. Add to which he was Force-sensitive and had been given a rudimentary education by a Jedi Master (who had no place in the prequels, IMHO). In the scenario you lay out, he triumphed because the Force was swinging toward good, and therefore it willed that Luke should succeed.

Again, I'm sure Lucas would like your explanation very much. As for me, I hate it.

Mike.
"I had a lot of different ideas. At one point, Luke, Leia and Ben were all going to be little people, and we did screen tests to see if we could do that." -George Lucas, in STAR WARS: the Annotated Screenplays (p197).
0

#24 User is offline   njamilla Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 283
  • Joined: 02-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington, DC
  • Interests:Black belts: aikido, kendo, iaido, jodo. 1987 World Fencing Championships, World University Games participant. Writer: novelist, freelancer. Interestes: Renaissance, religious history, turtles.
  • Country:United States

Posted 16 November 2003 - 09:08 AM

Re: Hinduism

You said evil has a right to exist. When you say “right” you expand the topic from religion into political science. But you underscore a deep philosophical underpinning of the SW universe. What is GL’s position on evil? Especially when he says that he’s only trying to create a metaphor for a “greater being” not specific religious, muc less consistent, thought.

If you go to Taoism or voodooism, you have two completing and yet complimentary essences – good and evil. Christianity, however, asserts there is only good in the universe, and evil is its corruption. I think there is a stronger argument for the latter because Lucas asserts in ROTJ that there is good in Vader and his corruption is redeemed by his return to the good. (I welcome counter arguments.)

I second the argument that a determinist SW universe is not the intent of Lucas. The swing toward a period of evil is in many ways antithetical to the assumption that people are good, but can act evil, but can return to acting good. Without a foundation that people can act as they please (free will) then mythical stories aren't meant to influence who and what we will become, but to make us accept the fact that whatever we do is far beyond our control.

Re: Science in SW

I think science is at the heart of the SW. Was it not Luke’s dilemma to choose between technology and the Force when he shot his photon torpedos? Rather than parse an extensive philosophy from that, I take it as a prescriptive moral to trust your instincts and feelings without over relying on technology.

I PREFER the mystic qualities of the Force over the scientific midichlorians, but why can’t we allow midichlorians? GL likens midichlorians to mitochondria, without which there wouldn’t be life. I think that’s the extent of his thinking when he created them. (We’re the one’s making the big deal out if it, and rightly so I think). However, if there’s a place for science in our own universe which does not on its own nullify faith, why can’t there be a place for midichlorians in the SW universe?

Let’s face it. Life isn’t fair. At the end of ROTJ we thought we all could become Jedi. Luke was an ordinary person like the rest of us. All of a sudden with the PT, Anakin is basically Hercules – human but spawn of the “galactic (G)god(s)”. Our angst about midichlorians, to some extent, is that somehow we ordinary mortals now do not have claim to Jedi status. But I don’t think that’s the case.

We are all human – yup, just like Jesus, Hercules, and Prince Siddhartha. So what part of us is divine or transcendent? I don’t think that the religious message for these people was that only a few could be called to faith, but that all could be called. So even if there is a Chosen One in SW, that doesn’t diminish the commitment (or faith) of the Jedi in SW. By extension, that doesn’t mean that we give up our real-world aspirations to be Jedi-like (i.e. good people). Regardless of whether a person has more Force ability than another, that doesn’t diminish the presence or power of lesser Jedi.

Not crazy about midicholorians but I don’t think it’s necessary to throw out the baby with the bath water.
Author: Sword Fighting in the Star Wars Universe.
0

#25 User is offline   rogue_scholar Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 12-November 03

Posted 16 November 2003 - 11:08 AM

QUOTE (civilian_number_two @ Nov 15 2003, 07:49 PM)
In your scenario, there is no place for Free Will. In my understanding of the original STAR WARS trilogy, Luke Skywalker triumphed because he was brave and strong-willed and just a genuine good guy who would not turn his back on his friends. Add to which he was Force-sensitive and had been given a rudimentary education by a Jedi Master (who had no place in the prequels, IMHO). In the scenario you lay out, he triumphed because the Force was swinging toward good, and therefore it willed that Luke should succeed.

You missed my point Civilian. I never meant to imply that there was no place for free will, but that the existence of free will does not change the fact that some things happen which are beyond our control; no matter how much free will we express, most of life will never go the way we want it to exactly.

Consider this: had Anakin Skywalker not turned to the Dark Side and become Darth Vader, he probably would never have gotten close enough to Palpatine to throw him off of the ledge and into the core of the Death Star as he did in ROTJ. Also, by doing this, he fulfilled the prophecy and brought balance to the Force; in fact, one could probably argue that it was he who defeated the Emperor, as Luke was somewhat incapacitaed at the time (I know, that's bad). And was it not Vader who said to Luke in TESB something in the way of, "You and I will destroy the Emperor . . ." I know, I know, to which you will most likely reply, " he also said '. . . and together we will rule the galaxy as father and son.' and it didn't happen that way!" But as I said before, most of life will never go the way we want it to, no matter how much free will we express.

Free will is one competing force in many within the universe- fate is also a factor. It's the reason why bad things sometimes happen to good people.
0

#26 User is offline   rogue_scholar Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 12-November 03

Posted 16 November 2003 - 01:44 PM

"You said evil has a right to exist. When you say “right” you expand the topic from religion into political science."

njamilla,

I used the word "right" for lack of a better way to describe the need for competing forces in the universe, which is propably what I should have said in the first place. Regardless, I'm sure you understood my point.

Now let's talk about Taoism, since much of my own spiritual beliefs are taken from the Tao Te Ching. You said that in Taoism, "you have two competing and yet complimentary essences," which you describe as good and evil (IMHO it's a little more complicated than that, but we'll leave that alone for now and go with your interpretation). Now, you'll notice that in the yin and yang, there is some of the white (good) in the black (evil) and some of the black in the white- a symbolic representation of one of the central precepts of Taoist (as well as most of eastern thought); the belief that all forces exist in a state of constant flux and within proximity of each other out of mutual need. Represented in the symbol of the yin and the yang is also the idea that there is some evil in good and some good in evil (thus, the black spot in the white side and vice versa).

With this in mind, the fact that there was some good in Vader does not necessarily make a stronger argument for the idea that the universe is naturally good and that evil is its corruption; there's good in Vader because there was also evil in Luke (remember his failure in the cave on Dagobah, and also his disobedience of Yoda and Obi-Wan in TESB). Of course, one could argue that disobeying Yoda and Obi-Wan was one of the best moves Luke made (which it was) because he saved his friends, but it does not take away from the fact that he was deviating at that moment from the Jedi way; giving into his passions, which for a Jedi is the path to the Dark Side.

I am also not arguing determinism, but, as I mentioned in my previous post to Civilian Number Two, am simply arguing that fate is a factor in life- a force in the universe competing against the power of free will. In the struggle between the two free will sometimes wins, but at other times we have no choice but to bow to fate. Finally, exercising your free will does not necessarily mean that you are not fulfilling your destiny or succumbing to fate (I know I'm going to catch it from a lot of people on this forum for that one, but before you all give me hell, think about it. . .).

As for the science of SW, I'm not against it's inclusion in the Star Wars universe, or even using it to explain certain aspects of the Force (I'm not one of these people who believes that science runs contrary to belief in the divine, just the opposite), but I think that the midichlorian idea is lame, mainly because it wasn't a factor in the storyline before and did not serve to enhance the idea behind the Force, but instead killed its mystique.
0

#27 User is offline   civilian_number_two Icon

  • Canada's Next Top Model.
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Head Moderator
  • Posts: 3,382
  • Joined: 01-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In Your Dreams
  • Interests:I like stuff.
  • Country:Canada

Posted 16 November 2003 - 04:09 PM

"Consider this: had Anakin Skywalker not turned to the Dark Side and become Darth Vader, he probably would never have gotten close enough to Palpatine to throw him off of the ledge and into the core of the Death Star as he did in ROTJ. Also, by doing this, he fulfilled the prophecy and brought balance to the Force; in fact, one could probably argue that it was he who defeated the Emperor, as Luke was somewhat incapacitaed at the time (I know, that's bad)."


Rogue Scholar,

I'm not sure that I really missed your point about the fluctuations in the Force, though there's a good chance you were going somewhere with the idea that I haven't acknowledged. But I'll reiterate my concern with that sort of thing. If we allow our heroes to exist in a universe where the Gods (or disembodied Forces) control and manipulate their abilities and destinies, then we're reading the Iliad, or worse, the Bible, and not some fun, escapist heroic fiction.

Lucas made three STAR WARS movies free of the idea that the Force sometimes favour good, and sometimes evil. The idea was that you could be tempted by the greater power of darkness, but that by the exertion of discipline you could choose the light. There was a personal decision at the heart of it, and Luke's triumph in JEDI was that his heart was good and he was prefered death to corruption. There was Free Will in his acceptance of defeat, not some predetermined nonsense akin to the Force giving up on him or suddenly limiting his powers. Now, in the PT, Lucas has added prophecies, and notions of "balance," so there's some idea of determinism in there, which frankly is the exact religious posturing that everybody hated about THE MATRIX. And if you're right, that the Force fluctuates, and sometimes Yoda has great sensitivity while at other times he can't recognize the Dark Lord when he's looking him right in the face, then there is no Free Will even in the flimsy way Lucas once acknowledged it. NOW, it's no longer enough to opt to work on the good side of the Force. If you're right, now the Force has to be swinging toward good as well. Which of course, leads me to the analogy that there was no political solution that would have prevented, say, WWII. The universe was just leaning, in those days, towards world war. But it was also prophecy and destiny that the allies would push the Germans back and that the Soviet and US empires would be given power to expand. It had nothing to do with the soldiers or the generals; it was just meant to happen that way, just like I was meant to eat bacon this morning.

In fact, I'm sure you're right, and that this is exactly what Lucas now means. I'm also sure that it's terribly lame, that it runs counter to the ethics of the original trilogy, and it's just one more way in which Lucas is taking my childhood memories and (metaphysically, now) kicking them in the nuts.

Mike.
"I had a lot of different ideas. At one point, Luke, Leia and Ben were all going to be little people, and we did screen tests to see if we could do that." -George Lucas, in STAR WARS: the Annotated Screenplays (p197).
0

#28 User is offline   rogue_scholar Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 12-November 03

Posted 16 November 2003 - 05:53 PM

QUOTE (civilian_number_two @ Nov 16 2003, 04:09 PM)
In fact, I'm sure you're right, and that this is exactly what Lucas now means. I'm also sure that it's terribly lame, that it runs counter to the ethics of the original trilogy, and it's just one more way in which Lucas is taking my childhood memories and (metaphysically, now) kicking them in the nuts.

LOL . . . I like you Civilian, although I hope you're not taking this too seriously.

Before I go on, I also hope that you (or anyone else for that matter) don't think that I am implying that what I'm arguing is necessarily what Lucas intended for the story. I'm simply saying that the idea of the Jedi ability to use the Force diminishing is not so far fetched, considering many of Lucas' inspirations for the Star Wars saga. I think that part of the problem with the prequals (which I hate just as much as anyone else) is that in addition to not really caring about the saga anymore, Lucas has forgotten what it's about.

However, you do make a very good point- a Jedi's ability to use the Force should not diminish. Those were the wrong words to use in Episode II. Instead, I see it like this, the inability for the Jedi to sense the Dark Side in Palpatine is much like the sinking of the Titanic, which was supposed to be unsinkable. You see, there's no such thing as an unsinkable ship or an earthquake proof building (or indestructible chew toys, as my dogs have demonstrated) because there will always be a situation where the integrity of whatever is being tested will be compromised.

The same is true of the Jedi; they have extraordinary abilities to be sure, but they are not gods themselves. They do not know everything and even their powers have limits. This being the case, once again, it is not inconceivable that even Yoda would not be able to sense the presence of the Dark Side in Palpatine (maybe Palpatine, who is himself the equivalent of a Jedi Master, has developed an ability that shields him from being detected). And, no, being one of the good guys is not enough to ensure that you win. If that were the case, then World War II wouldn't have happened, because the very fact that there are good people in the world would have prevented such a thing.

Bad things happen, Civilian, and no matter what anyone does, no matter what preparations they make or how strong they are, this is an inescapable-even more so, an inevitible- truth. To believe otherwise is naivete.

Peace
0

#29 User is offline   civilian_number_two Icon

  • Canada's Next Top Model.
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Head Moderator
  • Posts: 3,382
  • Joined: 01-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In Your Dreams
  • Interests:I like stuff.
  • Country:Canada

Posted 17 November 2003 - 12:47 AM

"Bad things happen, Civilian, and no matter what anyone does, no matter what preparations they make or how strong they are, this is an inescapable-even more so, an inevitible- truth. To believe otherwise is naivete. "


Hey,

I absoluteley agree. Despite incredible effort, huge expense and a lot of and wishful thinking, THE PHANTOM MENACE happened. It happened to us all. And as far as I know, it kept happening in the so-called Episode Two, which I will never watch. And we could not see any of it coming. we all had good reason to believe that George Lucas had it in him to executive produce a very good series of movies. I guess we should have known something is up, of course, when we learned that he also planned to write and direct these ones, but then there was naivete. Great STAR WARS fans that we had all once been, we could not recognize the evil of the new Lucas even when it stared us right in the face.

And really, with WILLOW already out there, we damn well should have.

Mike (still think I'm too serious?)

PS: On a serious note, Palpatine *should* have a special ability to cloud men's minds and hide himself from even the most Force sensitive. That would be a cool special power, and the sort of thing evil guys would need to live in a galaxy run by crazy zealots with laser swords and telekinesis. In fact, maybe *all* of the Jedi, or at least all of the Sith, should have special powers that they are better at. The Jedi world could be developed like the HARRY POTTER world, with different people having different special abilities. And maybe Palpatine could have been the guy who was best at the Force lightning and masking his identity. Why this didn't happen is that it required some serious development time, some real thinking. Lucas just wanted to sell toys and video games, and so was happy to film the first thing that came to his head, lame or no lame.
"I had a lot of different ideas. At one point, Luke, Leia and Ben were all going to be little people, and we did screen tests to see if we could do that." -George Lucas, in STAR WARS: the Annotated Screenplays (p197).
0

#30 User is offline   njamilla Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 283
  • Joined: 02-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington, DC
  • Interests:Black belts: aikido, kendo, iaido, jodo. 1987 World Fencing Championships, World University Games participant. Writer: novelist, freelancer. Interestes: Renaissance, religious history, turtles.
  • Country:United States

Posted 17 November 2003 - 06:55 PM

Rogue Scholar:

QUOTE
there was also evil in Luke


Therein is the crux of the problem, which is almost a Judeo-Christian v. I-don’t-know-what (animism, Eastern religion, dualism) debate? Is the universe essentially good (which equals divine)? Or is it a state of existence that is less than perfect? Is the essence of life essentially inert or transcendent?

Don’t know that we can answer any of those questions sufficiently, but in its application to SW (or our own world, if you want) here’s my thesis. It has been GL’s intention that Vader did not start out as any particular monster of a kid. In fact, he was innocent up to a point and then corrupted (for whatever reason) by fear (and anger and a desire for power). At some point, as we begin to see in EP 2, his actions begin to manifest evil deeds. He makes a choice, as Lucas might say. But do Vader’s early choices in life doom him to eternal damnation? ROTJ seems to posit, much like Christianity (and many other religions), that there is the possibility of redemption if one truly turns from one’s evil and repents in some fashion.

I would not construe Luke’s failure in the cave as an act of evil, nor would I think that of Luke’s disobedience to leave Yoda. And giving into passion is not the path to the Dark Side, it’s an act of humanity. Taking the easy path is the road to the Dark Side, for it is far more difficult (and dangerous) to do what is just than it is to do what is easy.

Accepting the inevitability of the universe (i.e. the swing of the pendulum toward good now, evil later) may be an aspect of everyone’s lot in life, but succumbing to its will does not follow the heroic pattern of self realization (which is following one’s calling to uphold justice by following one’s duty) that Lucas seems to demonstrate in Luke’s actions.

Even Arjuna’s dilemma in the Bhagavad Gita to fight against his relatives or not to fight can be seen to follow the events of the ROTJ. If Luke were to fight Vader, he would do his duty; he would eliminate an evil in the universe. In the end, Luke stays his hand and chooses not to kill his father, which corresponds to a Hindu’s belief that renunciation of action is a superior “action” that would lead to nirvana, a transcendence of samsara, the cycle of life and death (reincarnation). I haven’t thought through whether Luke has become a Bodhisattva (I doubt it), but there is the call to a greater existence, which, in the end, becomes quite unheroic. (I won’t go completely on a limb to say achieving a heroic life absolutely leads to an understanding that fulfilment does not come from heroic acts but from humility and self-effacement, though I’ve do have inclinations in that direction. Nietzsche would completely disagree with me.)

I think that’s where heroism diverges from later religious thought in that sacrifice is considered a better calling. Obi-Wan does in ANH, Qui-Gon does it TPM, and Luke is willing to sacrifice himself if it will save his father. It does. Through Luke’s willingness not to give in to hate (desire, fear, etc.), Vader sees the light and commits an act of repentance – ridding the universe of the Emperor.

After all that, I won’t get into whether the Emperor deserve a chance at redemption (try justifying Hitler’s right to be allowed to actualize his goodness), but for the purpose of the story, Luke does an act of goodness, which brings out of Vader a chance at redemption.

Although I would not want to get into a debate about Taoism and whether there is “some evil in good and some good in evil” (well, hell, why not!), I will say that our (humanity’s) debate about good and evil is, in its essence, rather simplistic, but for our sakes, the only vocabulary that we can use, to invoke Wittgenstein.

I certainly do appreciate your clarification that you are not advocating determinism, but as a swordsman bent naturally in training to some action, I feel very wary of any philosophical point of view which says that we should bow to the inevitablity of the universe, i.e. to not take action (even through inaction, which is an act of action) to improve “things” whether for the good of all, or for some personal “end to perfection.” And I do not think that’s the point you’re making.

Personally, I don’t think Lucas’ philosophy (if it exists or can be called thorough and coherent) is as complicated as our debate, but he does achieve a self-professed goal in challenging us (the public) to think a little more about (the) (G)god(s). There’s supposed to be a new book coming out entitled Philosophy and Star Wars, which is co-written by two young, but established professors. I hope it’s a good as the conversations we’re having.

Addenda: Hey, GL. Quit kicking Mike in his metaphysical nuts!
Author: Sword Fighting in the Star Wars Universe.
0

  • (3 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3


Fast Reply

  • Decrease editor size
  • Increase editor size