Chefelf.com Night Life: modhatter - Viewing Profile

Perhaps, but again... there's not a lot to suggest that this was ever a habit.

Let's examine it this way... Before the R2 incident, Ben has certainly never talked to Luke about the Force. Never corrected Owen's stories about Luke's father... There's not much to suggest that they knew eachother any better than a neighbor kid knows Mean Old Lady Hickenlooper who lives in the scary house at the end of the street. Once the neighbor kid meets Mean Old Lady Hickenlooper and comes in for milk and cookies, the kid will probably not keep calling her Mean Old Lady Hickenlooper, no matter how old the habit.

Similarly, it's possible to say that Luke might have kept calling him Ben on his homeplanet, trying to maintain the secret of his identity. (Although, again, it's hard to imagine that Obi-Wan Kenobi's enemies are going to be fooled by the pretense... "Wait, no, he's not the one we want. This one wearing Jedi robes through town is BEN Kenobi... Move along, move along.") But once Vader has killed him, the jig is up, and there is really no reason to keep up the pretense.

Again though... we're speculating. But I repeat, there is no good reason in the original trilogy why Luke wouldn't call Obi-Wan Obi-Wan on Hoth. So, unlike so many choices Lucas did make that contradicted the Original Trilogy, if Lucas had decided that Obi-Wan was just a ceremonial name, given to him upon completion of the Trials, it would not have conflicted with episodes 4-6. And, in fact, making it a ceremonial name makes MORE sense, given the whole Ben/Obi-Wan usage issues in the Original Trilogy. Further, that same issue would make Anakin the ceremonial name, creating more mystery in the prequels, AND avoiding that whole awful "Ani" nickname.

Yes, but even using that logic... when Luke mentions "old Ben," he doesn't even know that he and Obi-Wan are the same person. And from the sounds of it, there is no reason for Luke to have ever personally known an "old hermit." He doesn't seem to know where Ben actually lives, just that he is "out in this direction somewhere." Each seems to have a cursory ubnderstanding of who the other is. Ben knows Luke before he can introduce himself, and there is nothing to make you think Luke is surprised that Ben knows him [i.e. there is no indication that Ben knows him only because he's been guarding him from a distance], but there is also no real reason given in the source document [i.e. the film] why Luke wouldn't call him Obi-Wan on Hoth.

The point being... you have Vader, who know Obi-Wan the Jedi and still refers to him as Obi-Wan. And you have Leia, who is on a "diplomatic mission," who requests help of Obi-Wan. But you have Luke, who seems to know more OF Ben Kenobi than he knows him on a first-name basis, so to speak. But once they start traveling together, Luke knows that Ben is actually the Obi-Wan that Leia sent her message to, but still uses Ben. Which supports the possibility that Obi-Wan is a ceremonial name. Perhaps even a title, like Buddha or Mahatma... Consider how, formally, a former President is still called Mr. President.

Again, it's just a possibility, but it's a possibility supported by the original trilogy that could have been useful in constructing a more compelling storyline for the prequels, without destroying the continuity.

But actually... no. It is also the script itself which calls him Ben. Not Obi-Wan.

Although, that makes me wonder too... If youo at the scripts for ESB and RotJ, they seem to have almost completely dropped Obi-Wan in favor of Ben. The only time I can think of when he is referref to as Obi-Wan is by Vader, talking to the Emperor about Luke not having Obi-Wan any more... From the first time we see him on Hoth, he is being called Ben. Almost makes me think that Obi-Wan is largely a ceremonial name. Sort of like how a Pope or King takes a name of office.

Now, imagine if you will that, instead of beating us over the head that Anakin will turn evil, blah blah blah, we actually have something like the early drafts for A New Hope... You have Ben just completing his training under Master Yoda, and being given the ceremonial name of Obi-Wan Kenobi, In the same story, you have a father, Kane Skywalker, his two sons Justin and Bink, and his daughter Beru. Between Skywalker and the future "aunt" Beru, we know that either Justin or Bink must eventually complete the trials and become Anakin., But which?

So much of the folly of the prequel series is that we already KNOW what is going to happen. But, by using elements that already have some basis in the original trilogy, you could actually create drama.

Plus, as many of us believe, a large part of Star Wars' success comes from Han Solo, the rogue, the cad, the one who is essentially a good guy but isn't squeaky clean. It's hard to use Obi-Wan to recreate that kind of magic. But the one who will come to be known as Anakin, he is a truly great pilot, and could be a much more dashing, romantic, exciting character, and also be dedicated to self-preservation and a bit of a lovable jerk.

After all, look at the development of Lando. Can't you just see the pre-production meeting? Harrison doesn't know if he wants to do a third movie? Stick him in Carbonite. That way we're safe no matter what he chooses. But do we have an Episode 6 without Han? Sure we do... We'll make him the original owner of the Falcon, make him another basically nice guy who is also dedicated to self-preservation and a bit of a lovable jerk. We'll have him flirt with Leia the first time he sees her, and we'll even give him a name that sorta rhymes with Han... thus, Lando is born. Why didn't George Lucas use the same understanding of basic character development to create some prequel characters we actually care about, not because we know what will happen in the later episodes, but because they are actially interesting RIGHT NOW.

It's impossible for me to belive that George Lucas couldn't've called up Timothy Zahn or Lawrence Kasdan or SOMEbody and said, "Hey, I'm finally doing the prequels. Here's the basic story. Can you help me structure it for three parts, fact check it to make sure it's consistent with the original trilogy, etc?" We could have gotten a really amazing trilogy. Instead, we get 10 minutes here and there that would be really cool, except it's surrounded by 20 minutes on either side that is embarassibgly bad and doesn't jive with what we already know.

That was a VERY long post, but with very little content. So, to sum up...

No, most writers who are worth their weight in paper DON'T write stories full of inconsistencies. That's simply a fallacy, unsupported by fact. Because your arguments all stem from this fallacy, there's no point debating them. There IS no debate.