[njamilla]

Great posts! No morons in this group.

The physicality of the Force via midi-chlorians has always been juxtaposed against the spirituality of SW. However, the basic idea that some people got it, some people don't also has some possibility. Even with Jesus, not everyone can be him (Him). Not everyone is born with the ability to do a particular thing such as lightsaber fighting. Some people got it, some people don't.

Yes, the spirituality of the OT permits everyone to achieve what Luke did -- through faith, training, mentorship. We all aspire to that and like to think ourselves capable of the same. So perhaps there's an element of pissiness that you and I, all of a sudden, can't be Luke because you have to be born with the right blood count.

In many world religions there is one human figure who is the example. Could it be that Luke could be this "example?" (OK, then what is Anakin? Maybe he's the Angel Gabriel.)


Do I really believe what I said? Just a bit. I certainly acknowledge the inconsistencies of the concept. It does demystify something that had merits as a simple miracle. GL tried too hard to mix religion and science, and then fails miserably.

[rangwe]

Civnum2, wow. That's about it. Its what i find so repulsive about the concept of the force as an objective phenomena. Not that the Dark Side of the force wouldn't play in that realm, but it really reduces the Force. Anyone can potentially use it (and thus anyone can participate in the adventure of consciousness raising.....to only a priviledged or lucky few get to feel the force.

Njamilla, you can mix science and religion. Its an alchemy that takes skill, courage and a little luck. It *can* be done. But the movie scene is littered with the bones of those who tried to explore the Dragon's Cave and come back with fire.

- rangwe

[Mnesymone]

Everyone who mixes religion and science ends up south of the border looking at a map of Greenland. Why should George be so special.

But if you try to make something physical and quantifiable out of something that was spiritual you'll be bound to have some stuff go wrong, because some things just don't literally translate across that language barrier - however, Rangwe - could you cite an example of a successful religion/science crossover, I'm curious.

This post has been edited by Mnesymone: 08 April 2005 - 10:20 PM

[Despondent]

You have to wave it in everyone's face: Anikan is Darth Vader.

First you have to prove it. Got a beeping prop? Good. Let's say it measures "Force powers." That way we can prove this little boy is powerful in the force. Every five year old can understand that.

But Annie didn't understand. He ought to have been skeptical, but he doesn't show it.

"You'll understand when you're older," QG condescendingly responds.


Yeah. When he's older Then He'll resent Lucas.

[Chefelf]

civilian_number_two just summed up the problems with midi-cholorians (and, in fact, the entire prequel trilogy) better in three paragraphs than anyone else could have in volumes.

Bravo, civ2.

*bows*

[Hannibal]

The new Force is derived from pure blood, not to be enjoyed by the weak. It is the centre of a struggle between great beings, whose minions are mere robots and clones, LITERALLY, whose deaths do not matter, while the loss of great ones we are asked to lament. The new Force, without even getting too much into the nonsense of the Midichlorians, is elitist, unsocial, restrictive, and dare I say fascist.

Welcome to the Reason Why George Lucas made the trilogies backwards...

[Paladin]

I would love to add in some of my own arguements, but I don't think I can give anything that isn't already here!

Great job, guys!

[njamilla]

Civnum2, wow.  That's about it.  Its what i find so repulsive about the concept of the force as an objective phenomena.  Not that the Dark Side of the force wouldn't play in that realm, but it really reduces the Force.  Anyone can potentially use it (and thus anyone can participate in the adventure of consciousness raising.....to only a priviledged or lucky few get to feel the force.

Again I ask is it beause we don't get to be Jedi (you have to be chosen and have the proper midi count) that we don't like this new facet of the Force? The feeling we all got was that you and I could become a Jedi too. Not literally of course (except for those jediism people), but through our choices we could be like them -- doers of good who contribute to society as the Jedi would.

Even in this world (to use the analogy of the papacy which is in the headlines), everyone is called to do good as a Christian. Not everyone gets to be the pope. Not everyone gets the calling to become priest. Not everyone gets to be appointed a bishop or a cardinal.

Njamilla, you can mix science and religion.  Its an alchemy that takes skill, courage and a little luck.  It *can* be done.  But the movie scene is littered with the bones of those who tried to explore the Dragon's Cave and come back with fire.

LOL. Science grew out of religious study (at least in the Western context). Some, however, relegate what is religious as things that can only be explained by faith, because they can't find the scientific proof. Others have tried to see creation in some divine way, others in a mundane way, blah, blah blah.

GL stuck his head out too much when he attempted his alchemy. And, of course, he gets laughed as people should when a guy says he can turn lead into gold. Many theologians have tried to bridge the scientific gap and the theological gap. A big problem, however, is finding the right language to express it. GL should have left his Force thingy ambiguous, just as science tries not to impose itself on religious proof.

A criticism of the whole SW universe, both canon and non-canon (EU stuff), is that the creators of this fictional universe want to create a literal world without inconsistencies. One writer (even GL) writes something one way first, and then more writing tries to "fix" or "justify" the inconsistencies of the earlier writing. (For example, the revisionist statement that Vader and Obi-Wan were old men by the time they get to EP IV, instead of saying we didn't have rotoscope technology to make a better sword fight.) In the real world, there are a lot of inconsistencies.

So instead of saying that the Force is this, the Force is that, it would have been better if these different aspects were portrayed as differing view points or perspectives, rather than as literal absolutes. That's the real world way of looking at it. But in the end, how do midi-chlorians have GL better tell his story?

I guess it doesn't!

[Chefelf]

Again I ask is it beause we don't get to be Jedi (you have to be chosen and have the proper midi count) that we don't like this new facet of the Force? The feeling we all got was that you and I could become a Jedi too. Not literally of course (except for those jediism people), but through our choices we could be like them -- doers of good who contribute to society as the Jedi would.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I guess that's it, isn't it? This stupid blood test turns it into a birthrite thing. Who likes that? The story of the boy who grew up to be all-powerful because he was born with just the right crap in his blood (and through no fault of his own) is not exactly a Horatio Alger tale. It turns the story of a Jedi into that of some lucky idiot who was born with the right DNA.

And many people could make the same argument that Luke's story is similar. In ways it is. But without the presence of this quasi-scientific explanation we are left thinking that some people have more natural talent than others but that ANYONE can become a Jedi (and again, in the context of the Star Wars universe, not this universe).

If I were to fence Nick Jamilla I would say the odds are about 10 million to 1 (maybe greater) that I would have my "ass handed to me" as it were. However, I'd like to think that if I gave everything I had to study and travelled abroad (as Nick did) that in 10 years or so I could gain the knowledge, experience and skills to, at the very least, give Nick a decent match. This is, of course, in no way meant to take away from what Nick has achieved or gained. If Nick and I were to have started training at the exact same age and time and trained alongside each other, one of us would probably stand out as the better fencer due to our natural abilities (my money is again on Nick) but we would most likely both be at least in the same ballpark. Look at Wayne Gretzky. Who here knows the name of his brother who he played with through his entire childhood?

This is why I think that the Karate Kid trilogy told the same story a whole lot better. In this trilogy we have Daniel's rocky start (similar to Luke's in many ways), his further training and later his temptation by the dark side and, ultimately, (sorry to use that word, I think Lucas may have a patent on it) his redemption. Imagine a new Karate Kid prequel in which it is revealed that Daniel had some sort of high cell count in his blood that made him better than Johnny, who'd been training much longer.

Daniel learns a sort of Force teaching from Miyagi. What he learns is not brute force, it is not purely physical. Miyagi teaches Daniel to achieve balance and steady his mind through his particular teaching philiosophy. Luke goes through the same teachings with Yoda but I think that Daniel is probably a better student than Luke and Miyagi may actually offer a little more insight than Yoda does. Of course, Miyagi has the entirety of three movies to offer teachings alongside Daniel while Yoda has about half a movie with Luke to do the same.

Um. I drifted a bit off topic there. What was the question again?

[rangwe]

The truth is, everyone is called and everyone who heeds the call is accepted. Anyone who speaks and acts as the Christ in whatever manifestation they perceive the Christ to be in *is the same as the Christ*. "Anyone who speaks with my mouth is as I am", that is, they are the equivalent.

Not everyone gets to be the Pope or a Priest, but am I a hand, or a tooth? No, but I have those things within me. The light and the darkness shine through us. It surrounds us, it penetrates us, it binds the galaxy together.

Compare this to, "only people who *are* priests (in the temporal sense) are allowed to particpate in the Christ." Only if your trade federation account/genetic purity level/social class is high enough do you get to particpate meaningfully in life.

In one version I don't have to be a jedi to have a meaningful relationship with God/The Force/Life/The Universe and Everything. In the other, if I'm not part of the centers of concentrated power and priviledge, God doesn't want to know my name.

The Dark Side would have you believe the latter to be the 'truth' because its objective and you can 'measure it'. But you can measure mysticism too - by irrational, subjective means that...

NO NO NO moisture vaporator operations man #3287, that's "terrorist talk" there. Get back to work! Leave the Force to the experts!

Stanley Tweedle, Security Guard, Class 4, report to the protein bank for correction.

What is religious is *both* what can only be explained by faith and what can only be measured by a Tricorder. You cannot know the mystery unless you step between these two stone guardians of the infinitely infinite. Hannibal is speaking the truth when he says both ways lead to the Devil. Its Yin Yang - both good and evil have the seeds of the other in them, always. Stop. Be at peace. Stand between the two, and "feel" the force flowing through you as you stand between the Scylla and Charibdis of paradox. Q was revealing to Picard the most important moment of revelation for the Human Race in the final episode, and all Jean Luc could say was, "Q, what are you trying to say?" So close.....and yet so far. Q whispered into Picard's ear....nothing.

NO NO NO...its all about charting gaseous anomalies and showing alien races the superiority of the Federation!

Because the Dark Side doesn't want to know itself....kind of.

Yes, the language to express it is beyond us. Joseph Campbell said as much. Meanwhile, padawan Lucas is snoozing in the corner dreaming about the Hunger Buster Neck Pizza.

Being a RPG gamer geek myself, I understand how difficult it is to create worlds to "play in". As we are limited (I.e., Human), it's hard to come up with all the bases being covered. The idea has to come from yourself initially, but to develop it with completeness takes other people to lend you a hand.

NO NO NO...it's my vision my series I can do what I want with it, its mine you hear, I found it first, and its mine, you hear me? Mine mine mine and you can't have it!

Its hard enough to keep a world consistent with its own laws, let alone intigrated enough to withstand scrutiny.

I'm all for making them different viewpoints of the same thing (as they really are). Your suggestion is a good one. If only I'd seen evidence of that in the PT. I don't think getting kids to *want* to be kidnapped by Jedi so they can have cool powers is a good role model, do you?

What if Anakin hadn't wanted to go? Would the jedi have taken him by coercion?

Give me that old time religion any day. "Aphrodite, she's flighty but she's good enough for me." Lucas, who sang that during the Moyers interview? Lucas? Wake up, your Pizza is here!

- rangwe

[rangwe]

@Mnesymone: Off the top of my head, the character of the Surgeon in the Sci-Fi classic "Fantastic Voyage" is an example of a successful religion/science crossover. Here you have a rational, scientific character of cold intelligence waxing poetic about "the wonders of God" revealed by the imagery of "inner space". I think the surgeon is a wonderfully complex character, demonstrating reason and awe in a believable context.

Sean Connery's monk/ex-inquisitor character in The Name of the Rose is also a good crossover. A religious man tempered by the realities of nature (the laws of science) and intelligence (scientific reasoning). This expanded consciousness puts him at odds with the single-mindedness of both the zealous inquisitor, the fearfully conservative villain and the monks who see only the signs of the apocalypse and not the human evidence.

I'd also point to the campy eighties movie "Creator", with its emphasis on "the Big Picture" added to the pragmatic reality of science. That to be a true genius takes a blend of both science and philosophy. "Real Genius" also plays with this idea to a small extent, but less successfully as it focuses more on the personal implications of technology. Still, morality versus science plays a part, and its the fusion of the two that is the formula for success.

In the Midichlorine debate in another thread, its pointed out that science evolved from religion, and this is certainly to a degree true. The roots of science are in mysticism, both being attempts to understand the 'rules of the game of life' as it were.

The problem, I think, is in the fact that Lucas is choosing a means to portray the Force that excludes the irrational (that which cannot be explained), but he doesn't choose to follow through with the rational approach (because then he runs the risk of contradicting his formerly irrational approach to the Force - something that requires a lot of work and thought to pull off). Its not a bad idea per se, to focus on midichlorines - but it isn't what we have come to expect and he doesn't "take us down the other route" in a way that we can accept.

Its just handed to us, no explanation, no development. There's no "magic trick" to get us to buy it one way or the other. So, the only thing left for the audience to do is cry "bull****". People have brought this up before - if its mystical, then this current incarnation of the jedi is "bull****". If its midichlorines, then why isn't the Star Wars world consistent with this explanation?

- rangwe

[JW Wells]

You have to wave it in everyone's face: Anikan is Darth Vader.

First you have to prove it. Got a beeping prop? Good. Let's say it measures "Force powers." That way we can prove this little boy is powerful in the force. Every five year old can understand that.

But Annie didn't understand. He ought to have been skeptical, but he doesn't show it.

"You'll understand when you're older," QG condescendingly responds.
Yeah. When he's older  Then He'll resent Lucas.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think you dinged it, Despondent. Midichlorians are the end result of George Lucas needing to say "Annakin has a higher number next to his 'Force Mojo' stat than even Yoda!" It's a measure of his lack of ideas that he seizes on a slight reworking of the word "mitochondrion" to do indicate that there's an organelle within the human body that processes the force like mitochondria run the Krebs cycle.

It gets the job done, that is Qui-Gonn can talk about Annakin's "high midichlorian count", but this renders the Force about as interesting as cellular biology. I mean, do we go around saying "may the oxygen be with you"?

In earlier movies, Qui-Gonn would just have said "the Force is strong with this one" and moved on. Sad Lucas now has the money to be more elaborate.

[civilian_number_two]

Rangwe, you went too far: now the google ad at the bottom of my page is for some roleplaying game!

I don't think you provided any good examples of science meeting religion, since both were fictional, and both showed men of science balancing their reason with their religion. I think what you were asked for was some kind of scientific explanation of a religious priciple, like how, scientifically, did Jesus fell all those people of turn that water into wine, or whatever.

Anyway, Nick: I think it is just that, that the weakness of the new Force is that it is elitist. Compared with superhero narratives, which portray people we can never be, it's the human qualities we cling to. I think maybe there was a chance Lucas could have played with the idea of inherited Force sensitivity, and made of the Jedi a kind of genetic superman, but he just handled it wrong. He made their special nature unlikeable by playing loose with the lives of "little people."

Secondly, I think there is a fundamental resistance in the human spirit to dumb bullshit. A race of genetic supermen who are forbidden to love just feels realy bad. What happens then? Do the Jedi have sex with prostitutes, adopt the bastard children and have Yoda train them in his tower? This is no longer fun; it's convoluted and creepy.

[Mnesymone]

A few points I'd like to make.
Why are all the Jedi monklike bachelors - perhaps to preserve their higher blood... but they have no touch with the world at all - they don't even relate to each other well - George went over the top with the 'when you are calm' - they are calm to the extent that they seem drugged. I only noticed two relationships in this whole prequel affair - one, because it was hammered into our brains - Padme and Anakin's overly theatrical love affair - and a probably unintentional tenderness between Shmi and Qui-Gon - probably stemming from an offscreen dissatisfaction with their names. (This is relevant because if the Jedi are unable to enter relationships - how do they propagate if we assume it is genetic.)

Two - if the Force is genetic, and it confers survivorship, then wouldn't the evolutionary process gradually bring the Jedi into the majority within their respective species?

Why did Qui-Gon need his prop to guage the Force in Anakin - why not "the Force is strong in this one" - a tremor or disturbance in the Force that Force-users can sense - to package it for a stupid audience - or a stupid author?

[ernesttomlinson]

It gets the job done, that is Qui-Gonn can talk about Annakin's "high midichlorian count", but this renders the Force about as interesting as cellular biology.

Cellular biology is fascinating! Don't put it down by comparing it to something George Lucas came up with.

Ursula LeGuin in her fourth and rather controversial Earthsea book, Tehanu, reveals that the wizards of Earthsea, Ged included, are all celibate and that this damming-up of their sexuality is somehow what fuels their magical ability. It's an intriguing idea, if not a particularly subtle one. Perhaps Lucas had it in mind when he doped out his "Jedi are forbidden to love" plot device.

The "unintentional tenderness" between Qui-Gon and Shmi Skywalker probably came about because Liam Neeson and Pernilla August (who got her career kick-start from Ingmar Bergman and that's a hell of a start) were two good and unhappy actors stuck in a thankless production. I'll bet there was a lot of off-screen commiseration between them.