For STAR WARS fans: A Philosophical Question

[AUSSIE-Rebooted-AMM]

fallensaviour
The whole idea is missed that maybe Anakin was never the chosen one to begin with!!!
It is my belief that the chosen one was always Luke.
Yoda even stated in regards to Anakin that future with him is uncertain.

Absolutely - couldn't agree more!

fallensaviour
And in closing why did Yoda never check Lukes midaclorian levels anyway???.....

I think that Obi and Yoda themselves decided that the whole Idea of mediclorians was totally LAME. . . .and decided that the Jedi's rebooted should never know of them, and make the force this mysterious entityand life force that flows through all living things!

[huedell]

I'll just quote myself...

speaking of which----wow----Aussie really helped me out here
because quite frankly, he eloquently typed many things I don't have the paitence to type----your posts are nice and thorough darklord---but I
actually AGREE more with Aussie's take on the Kenobi character.

...why not...we're basically in synch...why not celebrate it

[huedell]

This might confuse things more...but I never use new trilogy stuff
to explain/justify old trilogy stuff---because I DO buy the idea
that Lucas didn't have everything planned out to the last detail
in the 70s/80s for what transpired in the 90s/00s.

So, yes, NEW HOPE, ESB and ROTJ plot points have bearing on
the PAST (I, II, III) and how they are interpreted----but not vice versa
---in my posts personally anyway.

[darklord1967]

And since I disagree so wholeheartedly with your, darklord's and whoever's posts---I'm screwed because I have an EASY answer to why I
disagree----I hate typing too---and with all respect---I feel you guys just
don't "get it".


What I think is that some people like raydeen and darklord quite frankly
fell for George Lucas' brilliant plotting of the Anakin(/Luke) story---
or more specifically the Anakin(/Luke) charcters.

Lucas suceeded in making those characters SO overly sympathetic
in spite of their flaws that certain people BOUGHT IT ALL---
like Anakin and Luke are their flawless alcoholic brothers or something---

Huedell, buddy, I think it's YOU who doesn't quite "get it".

You see, ultimately there is no "right" or "wrong" regarding whether or not Obi-Wan lied to Luke in A NEW HOPE.

There is no "right" or "wrong" regarding the viability, wisdom, and practicality of the Jedi life philosophy.

There are only personal opinions on this. Personal viewpoints based on each of our own experiences, values, belief systems, prejudices, and preferences.

That's the point.

Ultimately, the brilliance of George Lucas's STAR WARS creation is that it speaks to the multi-faceted nature of the human condition. It reminds us that through free will, all of life's choices are available for us to make for ourselves. The ability to make the very best (or the very worst) possible reality for ourselves, our loved ones, and our planet reside within us.

For every opinion expressed in this thread, there is strength and a logic that is borne from a real human viewpoint. THAT makes it real. That makes it legitimate.

Opposing views are just as real and just as legitimate. But no side has a "corner on the market" on being right. That type of rigid thinking leads mostly to friction and conflict rather than to cooperation and understanding.

George Lucas, despite what cynics might say, actually encourages philosophical conversations like this one, via his STAR WARS creation. He encourages us to ask questions, engage in dialogue, and to make up our own minds about the larger philosophical questions in life.

Hopefully, in the process, we will learn something about ourselves and others around us.

That has incredible value.

Is it better to serve an order or group unquestioningly, than to question its belief system which might be flawed or self-destructive? History teaches us that men who did this, invariably caused pain and suffering in their own lives as well as the lives of others. I'm reminded of captured Nazi soldiers, who when placed on trial for "crimes against humanity" simply used the defense. "I was only following orders".

It is ever reasonable (or even wise) to function through life purely with one set of human emotions intact while consciously attempting to disconnect other emotions for the sake of a group or belief-system? Does that make for a complete and well-balanced human being... especially one who wishes to "serve others"?

What are "positive" and "negative" human emotional traits? How are they defined? And more to the point, who defines them?

Is it ever alright to lie to someone? Under what circumstances is it acceptable? What constitutes the lack of integrity of a false statement?

Is someone ever too old or too young to learn something?

What are selfishness and greed, how are they defined, and more to the point, can those emotions have compassionate applications based on the context of a situation?

What has more intrinsic, universal human value, a belief-system OR the rights of the individual?

What is pure good? What is pure evil? Do those things even exist? Can perceptions of the two be distorted by the enormously self-destructive (and collectively-destructive) human EGO?

What makes up the final essence of a human being? And can it be destroyed while a living body remains?


These are all questions that George Lucas and the STAR WARS saga encourage us to ask and grapple with.

Interestingly enough, Obi-Wan Kenobi said it best in RETURN OF THE JEDI when he suggested that the truths to these and many other questions "... depend greatly on our own point of view...".

I DON'T, by any means, suggest that this topic of conversation should come to a close. Quite the contrary. I am certainly still interested to read the additional viewpoints of any others who wish to chime in.

I salute and thank you Hudell, Aussie , Rayden, Fallensavior, Spyweb007 and everyone else for your fine contributions to this thread. May this type of thought-provoking conversation continue to bring us all closer together.

May The Force Be With You All

-Roberto

[fallensaviour]

Interestingly enough, Obi-Wan Kenobi said it best in RETURN OF THE JEDI when he suggested that the truths to these and many other questions "... depend greatly on our own point of view...".

You are forgetting one thing though???





Obi-Wan may have been lying again!?!?!?!?!...LOL

[Gorn Captain]

I think a better question would be did anyone in Star Wars not lie?

Sand People never lie.

They'd just probably bash your head in, instead....

[darklord1967]

Hi guys!

Over on Rebelscum.com a conversation similar to this one was in progress and I participated.

A gentleman by the name of Tim Mcshane chimed in with viewpoints similar to Huedell and Aussie.

He had responded to viewpoints which I had originally posted over here in this thread.

Since it's applicable to the thread here, I've decided to post our conversation:


NOTE: This transcript of our conversation is NOT just my same viewpoint re-hashed.

My conversation with Tim took some interesting turns, and I made many new observations that I hadn't expressed here. Those rebuttals are presented in BOLD TYPE

Wow, DL1967--a lot to respond to...I'll just take these few snippets;

Anakin was an exemplary Jedi. He won battle after battle on behalf of the Republic during the Clone Wars.

That indicates he was a good fighter, not an "exemplary Jedi"

Really? Well, I'll talk about "exemplary Jedi" in just a moment (see below), and we'll see how far off the mark I am in praising Anakin as such. Read on...

************************************************** ************************************************** ***********************

He single-handedly killed Count Dooku,

knowing it was the wrong thing to do, that Dooku should have been brought before the Council to face justice.

Okay. This is the type of thing I refer to when I suggest that these issues are PURELY subjective... a matter of Point of view.

I respect yours, Tim_McShane . I really do. But in your pointing out Anakin's vicious un-Jedi like killing of Count Dooku, you actually help me to prove my point:



Let us agree that it was vicious and wrong of Anakin to behead Darth Tyrannus when he was unarmed and already defeated.

No arguments from me. But consider this:


Mace Windu was about to do THE EXACT SAME THING to an unarmed, weakened, and defeated Chancellor Palpatine/ Darth Sidious... He was about to kill him in cold blood. It was Anakin who pointed out that Palpatine should be arrested to stand trial.

Windu's response was that Palpatine was "... too dangerous to be left alive..."

And guess what? That was Palpatine's EXACT SAME JUSTIFICATION to Anakin for the beheading of Count Dooku!

"He was too dangerous to be left alive." That's what Palpatine said.

So here we have a Jedi knight and a Sith Lord with IDENTICAL justifications for taking the life of an already defeated adversary.

Interesting. Flip side of the same coin perhaps? This is the type of philosophical dillema that George Lucas was having fun exploring... especially in Episode III.

Viewpoints. This is what I'm talking about.

Anakin can only really be judged harshly in this instance if one adopts a uniquely jedi standpoint. And even THEN, there are contradictions and hypocricies.

Anakin only did the very thing that Mace Windu was about to do to a defeated Palpatine.

The difference is that Windu likely would have been CELEBRATED for committing Palpatine's murder.

************************************************** ************************************************** ***********************

rescued the kidnapped Supreme Chancellor, as the Chancellor/Sith Lord connived that he would--no great feat there.

"No great feat" you say?

Not even Palpatine's conniving could forsee all of the (real / legitimate) obstacles that Anakin would have to heroically face to rescue the kidnapped Chancellor.

Staged or not, Palpatine's kidnapping was REAL to Anakin, and he risked his life to save his mentor and his friend.

Furthermore, General Grievous had no idea Palpatine was also Darth Sidious. The general was not knowingly cooperating in Palpatine's faked kidnapping plot. As far as he knew, he was taking his orders from Darth Sidious.

Only Count Dooku / Darth Tyrannus knew Sidious' true identity, and not even HE was privy to the full details of Palpatine's faked kidnapping plot.

Indeed, Dooku was completely unaware that he himself was only a PAWN in the plot and therefore expendable.

Additionally, I suppose you offer NO CREDIT for Anakin's numerous close calls with Buzz Droids, Missiles, and Tri-Fighters during the space battle that he had to fly through ON HIS WAY to rescue the Chancellor.

While we're at it, I guess Anakin should get NO CREDIT for his desire to help overwhelmed Clone fighter pilots during the battle... nor should he get any credit for saving Obi-Wan's life when Kenobi's fighter was being quickly taken apart in mid-flight by Buzz Droids.

And I guess NO CREDIT should be offered for Anakin's refusal to abandon Kenobi when the situation in his starfighter looked bleak and beyond all hope.

You know, while we're at it, let's offer NO CREDIT for Anakin's refusal to abandon an unconscious Kenobi and condemn him to DEATH (as Palpatine suggested) in order for them to escape the Separatist Cruiser.

And let's offer NO CREDIT for Anakin's carrying an unconcious Kenobi on his back while helping lead Palpatine to safety.

And as for Anakin safely crash-landing half of the flaming wreckage of a Seperatist Cruiser and getting Palpatine, Kenobi, Artoo and himself safely down to Coruscant in one piece... NO CREDIT there either.

"No great feat" you say? Really? I sincerely doubt that ANY of the other Jedi... including senior members of the Council itself ( Re: Yoda and Mace Windu) would have fared any better.

************************************************** ************************************************** ***********************

Even after Palpatine revealed himself as a Sith Lord, Anakin's first act (due to his allegance to the Jedi) was to threaten him at sword point. And don't forget: This was probably the only man who was supportive of him and treated him kindly. Of course, Anakin's second act was to report Palpatine as a Sith Lord to Mace Windu so that he could be arrested.

What did he get for his troubles? More suspicion and mistrust from Windu: (Re: MACE: For your own good, stay here, Anakin. I sense much confusion that clouds your judgement. If what you have told me is true, you will have gained my trust.")

And you don't think Mace was justified in saying this?

I do not. Windu had absolutely NO REASON to be suspicious of (or mistrust) Anakin at that point.

************************************************** ************************************************** ***********************

After all, Anakin ignores what he's told, goes to the Chancellor's office, and weakens Mace so that a known Sith Lord can get the better of him, and kill him. Seems to me Mace called that one dead-to-rights.

Did he call that one "dead-to-rights", as you suggest, Or did he inadvertantly create the conditions of own fate by being so hostile toward Anakin?

Prior to betraying Mace Windu, ANAKIN WAS NOT GUILTY OF ANYTHING.

Anakin's terrible betrayal of Mace Windu was (in my eyes) partially the culmination of years of un-necessary hostility perpetuated by Windu. Perhaps if Windu were more supportive and compasionate toward Anakin, the boy might be more inclined to obey him, and certainly not to betray him.

************************************************** ************************************************** ***********************

Anakin was a flawed character.

Yes he was. As were they all.

************************************************** ************************************************** ***********************

He was not a good Jedi (he recognized it himself--"I'm not the Jedi I should be. I am one of the most powerful Jedi, but I'm not satisfied ... I want more, and I know I shouldn't")

Well, FIRST of all... You're paraphrasing.

While most of your quote is accurate, the most critical part of it is not ( Re: "... I am one of the most powerful jedi, but I'm not satisfied"). Anakin NEVER said that.

Secondly, a good part of Anakin's anger, fear, and aggression (sound familiar?) surrounding his personal troubles (In Ep III) were being manipulated into him by Palpatine. Part of the Sith lord's slow seduction was to build and cultivate a greedy, aggressive desire within Anakin for more and more power... based on his fears.

But this was NOT Anakin's initial nature, nor his instinct.

In point of fact, when we first met him in Episode I: THE PHANTOM MENACE as a little boy, Anakin's humble nature was to be completely selfless and totally devoid of greed.

That was George Lucas' whole point for beginning the STAR WARS saga with Anakin at age 9... so that we could see the progression of WHAT HE ORIGINALLY WAS versus what he ultimately BECAME TWISTED INTO.

(Re

SHMI: He knows nothing of greed.

JIRA: Oh, Ani, you're the kindest little boy in the galaxy.

ANAKIN: Mom, you said the biggest problem in this universe is that no one helps each other.



Years later, Anakin's emerging greed... his desire for more and more... was something that confused and troubled even HIM, because it was NOT HIS NATURE. The Dark Side of the Force was already exerting its influence on him through Palpatine's manipulations.

But these manipulations did NOT start the day before. They were slow and steady and they were inflicted upon an impressionable child by an old man with a sinister agenda, and a tremendous amount of patience.

As the victim, Anakin cannot be blamed for that.

It could very reasonably be argued that Anakin was initially such a good, decent, and selfless human being that it took Palpatine more than 13 YEARS to turn him completely... despite the fact that he was so gentle and fatherly toward him while simultaneously the Jedi were being so hostile.

You say Anakin was not a "good Jedi".

I say he was certainly a good enough human being that he STILL had the humility to be aware of his own emotional short-commings BASED ON JEDI PHILOSOPHY... as you illustrated here. That's actually a little more than I can say for some other Jedi.

Don't forget: In Episode II: ATTACK OF THE CLONES, Kenobi had a conversation with Yoda and Mace Windu where he described Anakin as "...arrogant..."

But Yoda's response was to point out that this was a problem that was "... more and more common among the jedi. Too sure of themselves, they are... even the older, more experienced ones."

That was very insightful of Yoda. But just who do you think Yoda was referring to when he pointed out the arrogance of the "... older, more experienced..." Jedi Knights?

Could he have been referring to senior member of the Jedi Council? Mace Windu, perhaps?

Could he even have been referring to himself?

These older, more experienced jedi that suffered from the arrogance that Yoda speaks of... what was THEIR excuse for being that way?

At the very least, Anakin had a SITH LORD secretly creating and cultivating that arrogance within him as his excuse.

Look, all I'm suggesting is that STAR WARS is far more complex than what is merely presented on the surface. Learn to read between the lines and you might see stuff that challenges YOUR belief system and viewpoint.

************************************************** ************************************************** ***********************

--he was unable to achieve detachment or overcome desire, and that's what led to his downfall. It had nothing to do with Obi-Wan or the other Jedi being 'big meanies' to him.

Some might say Anakin was "following his feelings", or "trusting his feelings", or "acting on instinct"... all things that Kenobi himself saw the value of years later when training Luke.

In Ep. II: ATTACK OF THE CLONES, Anakin's lack of "detachment" (as you say), led him to want to circle back and retrieve Padme when she fell out of the Republic Gunship.

Obi-Wan Kenobi chided Anakin for letting his "... personal feelings get in the way..." of the job they had to do... which was to capture a fleeing Count Dooku.

But mere minutes later, when Yoda is battling Dooku in that Geonosian Hangar, Yoda actually ALLOWS DOOKU TO ESCAPE.

And why?

Because he... excuse me... had to stop a heavy crane from crushing an incapacitated Anakin and Obi-Wan?

Did Yoda lack "detachment"?

Should Yoda have let his two comrades die simply for the sake of a philosophy that demanded he harbor no emotional attachment to them or to loved ones?

That's an oxymoron.

Loving someone or being their friend IS an emotional "attachment". That's not something that you casually switch on or off.

Prior to Anakin's Dark Side fall, Obi-Wan Kenobi and his apprentice loved each other as brothers, and as comrades in arms.

There was an emotional bond there... an "attachment", if you will, that ensured Anakin saved Kenobi's life many times.

Was that wrong?

The Jedi philosophy is supposedly based around compassion and serving "others" in need.

Well, who exactly are these "others" that the Jedi supposedly serve?

Because I gotta tell you, I have yet to have someone adequately explain to me why it is that those "others" DO NOT include loved ones or relatives of Jedi Knights.

Anakin is widely criticized by supporters of Jedi philosophy for not maintaining the proper emotional Jedi detachment toward Padme or even toward his mother whom he knew was in pain and dying.

He wanted to save them both because he loved them.

Somehow that is a bad thing.

But I continue to ask: How is that any different than the numerous times Anakin saved Kenobi's life out of love for him?

How is that any different than what Yoda did in that Hangar on Geonosis?

Didn't Yoda "... have a job to do..." (as Kenobi said to Anakin)?

Didn't Yoda have a responsibility (according to Jedi codes of emotional detachment) to ensure that Dooku did not escape... even if it meant the lives of Kenobi and Skywalker?

I see a bit of a double-standard here.

All I'm saying is that Jedi supporters seem to widely attack Anakin for his personal choices. And yet (with the exception of embracing the Dark Side of the force), most of his choices can be seen mirrored in the actions of even the most "exemplary" of Jedi... even those on the council.


As for whether or not the Jedi's hostility toward Anakin contributed to his Dark Side fall, I see this as pretty cut and dry:

It might not be a good idea to spend years being hostile toward your "star player"... the Jedi Chosen One. You might really need him when you're in a pinch, and that type of hostility might breed resentment that would make it really difficult for him to be in your corner when you might need him most.

If nothing else, the jedi's rejection and hostility toward Anakin was extremely short-sighted... and look what it got them.

[Seeker]

You are forgetting one thing though???





Obi-Wan may have been lying again!?!?!?!?!...LOL

And you didnt even waste a hour of your life writing that.

[darklord1967]

And you didnt even waste a hour of your life writing that.

Well, speaking for myself, I didn't "Waste an hour of my life" either.

But I SPENT about an hour and half drafting those rebuttals. And I don't consider them a "waste" of my time.

Don't YOU consider it to be a "waste" of YOUR time to continually post to a thread that you have failed to derail despite your repeated attempts to do so?

[darklord1967]

The Jedi are about helping their fellow man. So that somehow means Anikan or Luke or Windou or any other Jedi, are not fellow men? C'mon Hue. That's just ludicrous.

"Helping your fellow man" What thin air did you pull that out from?
The Jedi were the police force of the galaxy...as ordained by the Senate.
And just like any police force---they have codes and rules.

You just don't get it do you. You can't be a part of the police force
and then allow the problems of single policemen to screw up the fate
of the whole city....or galaxy, in the case of the Jedis.
I'll tell you what's "ludicruous"...the fact I'm debating with people who don't
understand this VERY SIMPLE aspect of what being a Jedi meant
when they were the police force of the galaxy.

“What thin air”, you ask? How about this:


OBI-WAN: For over a thousand generations, the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the galaxy.


OR… how about what YOU YOURSELF said several posts ago:

… That's the POINT....you use the Force to help others...the galaxy…

As the “police force of the galaxy”, ordained by the Senate (as you describe them), the Jedi Knights were charged with maintaining peace, order and justice in the galaxy. To serve and to protect.

That means negotiating and resolving conflicts, keeping political uprisings in check, serving as political mediators, assisting the needs of Republic citizens in the face of natural and artificial disasters, defending the populace against outside threats, and enforcing Republic law.

The were often called upon to serve as benevolent emmisaries and diplomats to new worlds hoping to join The Republic.

In addition, as Light-Side Force practitioners , leading a monk-like existence, they also strived to serve as the moral and spiritual leaders of “decency and goodness” throughout the Republic… an example of righteousness and cooperation for the Republic to follow.

With all they strived to do and achieve in principal and on behalf of the Republic, they were DEFINITELY “helpers of fellow man”, as Raydeen suggested.

Your description of the Jedi Knights as merely the “police Force of the galaxy” is a gross understatement of the service they tried to provide and how they should probably be defined.

Yes, Police Forces have their rules and codes. But those codes operate within the letter of the law... established for the common good and protection of ALL. They do NOT exclude the family members or loved ones of the very officers in its ranks.


I mean, I don’t know of ANY mere modern police force that practices a “rule” or “code” that forbids it’s members from having a family, or insists that they sever all ties with their known family.

I don’t know of any mere modern police force that disobeys the letter of the law and selectively allows the family member or loved one of one of its members to be murdered or killed (without attempted prevention) simply for the sake of some “no personal attachment” code. (Re: Anakin’s mother).

And I certainly don’t know of any mere modern police force that insists upon a single theocracy or belief system within its ranks… or that insists upon its members owning no possessions, or insists upon forbidding notions of independent self-determination.

Those qualities combined together... when they look like it, sound like it, and smell like it, you call them what they are: A cult.

I do not use that label as an indictment against the Jedi Knights. After all, every religious order in the world in one way or the other can be defined as "a cult". It doesn't necessarily make it a bad organization.

But what I'm trying to impress upon you, Huedell, is that The Jedi Knights are so much more than just a galactic police force.

What I think is so "ludicrous" is that someone who is such a big defender of the Jedi Knights and their principles (like you are) could so thoroughly under-state and pigeon-hole the qualities that define them.

Couplea things....Anakin's THOUGHTS ...his MUSINGS on him self being
wrong---too selfish----too lustful for power----mean nothing to me.

I mean so WHAT if he felt guilty?

ACTIONS and NOT words or thoughts are what are important.
"Struggle schummgle"...Ani lost...and so did the galaxy....or at least all the innocents Vader killed.

C'mon...I don't REALLY have to spell out how Anakin's rash attack on Dooku
in Clones---his attack on the Sandpeople in Clones etc. etc. are all things
that Anakin would do and Obi Wan would not. Give me a break here.

Okay, I understand what you're saying, Huedell. And I strongly agree that one must take responsibility for one's own ACTIONS.

Ultimately, THAT’S what your most vehement point against Anakin's character seems to be.

But in this particular instance, I believe we have another subject that requires consideration which falls under the category of "personal interpretation".

And it is this:

When discussing the (often mystical) STAR WARS universe and the Power of the Dark Side of the Force, it is important to acknowledge the tremendous influence that it can have over the seduced victim.

You see, the Dark Side of the Force can actually momentarily rob an individual of their free will, and make them do things that they would not normally do.

Think of it as temporary insanity. The individual is NOT fully in control. Or more "mystically", think of it as a form of demonic possession.

I think that's why George Lucas tends to use the standard demonic possession movie visual cue of creepy glowing eyes to represent a surge of raw power flowing through a Dark-Side practitioner and possessing his thoughts and actions.

Now, the duration of this possession / insanity is dependent upon the level of heated emotions at the moment (which is why Palpatine always worked so hard to keep Anakin either angry, in pain, or afraid)

It is also dependent upon the extent to which the individual has knowingly or unknowingly embraced the Dark Side.

When Anakin fought and killed Count Dooku, he had not yet consciously embraced the Dark Side of the Force. So it's influence on him and his actions was only fleeting... just very brief moments.

The Dark Side was still an outside influence that was focused and directed by Palpatine. So in this instance, think of Palpatine as a hypnotist temporarily placing Anakin under a spell.

Later, when Anakin fully embraced the Dark Side of the Force (as the Sith Lord Darth Vader) he lived in a perpetual state of rage, unhappiness, pain and apprehension... fueled by (and to) the Dark Side itself... and it's physical embodiment, The Emperor Palpatine.

In many ways, The Dark Side of the Force develops a symbiotic relationship with the seduced individual: Paraphrasing what Obi-Wan Kenobi said in A NEW HOPE, The (Dark Side of the) Force is what gives a (Sith Lord) his power.

But the possessed individual actually also feeds the Dark Side of The Force and makes it stronger with his or her own raw "negative" emotions (anger, fear, hatred, jealousy, envy, wrath, vanity, selfishness, etc.), and with his or her own "negative" actions. (aggression, destruction, pestilence, murder, treachery, etc).

So the The Dark Side of The Force and its victim's primal negativity strengthen one another. Symbiotic relationship. They need each other to thrive.

But in that same way, the cycle of mutual "nourishment" can be broken if the Dark Side practitioner either has a sudden powerful epiphany of "positive" emotion or action (compassion for someone else, selflessness, joy, love, forgiveness etc.), OR if an external force of tremendous influence demonstrates these "positive" qualities / actions toward the seduced victim.

This is probably what happened to Anakin Skywalker through his son Luke, and it explains why The Dark Side's hold on him was so suddenly broken.

The Dark Side of the Force can hold someone it its grip of madness and possession for quite a long time.

However, it is a tenuous and weak link, requiring constant mutual feeding of "negativity" to avoid the link being broken.



Some of this stuff is a bit... difficult to explain.

But there are STRONG indications that this is how George Lucas himself at least partially views The Force and those who use it's power:

Now as for facts to support my viewpoint on this? Note this scene from A NEW HOPE:


OBI-WAN: Remember, a Jedi can feel The Force flowing through him.

LUKE: You mean it controls your actions?

OBi-WAN: Partially, but it also obeys your commands.


So, it seems that George Lucas is pointing to a power greater than oneself (The Force) that obeys commands, but at times controls your actions too.

I suspect that the Dark Side of the Force "controls" its victims and their actions FAR MORE than it "obeys their command"s... especially if the victim is angry or afraid or in pain.

The Dark Side of the Force is also quick to seize control of children and the very young. It does this because children and the very young are "...quick and easy..." victims: Once again, this mirrors cases of demonic possession in children. Their emotions and desires are still so raw and primal and devoid of true intellect. Their sense of self-control is still completely un-developed. Their moral compass is not yet established, so there is virtually no resistance against the Dark Side.

This is the main reason why Jedi Knights are trained from infancy. (Source: Episode I: The Phantom Menace novelization)

The Light-Side of The Force is calm, peaceful, and passive in whatever influence it exerts upon its practitioner (Re: YODA:... when you are calm... at peace... passive)

But by contrast, the Dark Side of the Force is turbulent, raging, and most aggressive in the influence and control of free will that is seizes from its victim.

Mastery of the Dark Side of the Force clearly takes many years... far more years than Anakin had lived as Darth Vader. Mostly, he was the Dark Side's slave and puppet... acting under its direct influence and intoxicated by the sensation of raw POWER surging through him.

Interestingly enough, George Lucas' early draft screenplay of REVENGE OF THE SITH features a very interesting line of dialogue that didn't make it into the final film:

Immediately after Anakin kills Count Dooku, he seems shocked and astonished. His first line of dialogue was actually " ... I couldn't stop myself..."... again, as if he were NOT in control of his own actions.

Yoda, Ben and the Jedi "creating the problem that was Vader?"

Mayyyyyyybe.

AGAIN....ONLY if you subscribe to the idea that the Jedi
shouldn't have accepted Anakin/Vader into Jedi training to begin with.

Well, since YOU have repeatedly gone on record to say that The Jedi should NOT have accepted Anakin for Jedi Knight training, I don't see how you can hold the Jedi blameless for the "problem of Darth Vader". That contradicts what you said above.


Here are just a couple of YOUR quotes.

The only sensible things here would've been for... the Jedi not to ever have agreed to train Anakin in the first place.

He shouldn't have been trained at all----or if he WAS to be trained maybe more of it should been focused on not being such a selfish, rash person instead of the choke hold.

If the Jedi were ever guilty of ANYthing in this case...it's allowing Anakin to be trained.

Look, as a 9 year old child, Anakin Skywalker may have been too old to begin Jedi training according to Jedi tradition and code.

But it was not Anakin's fault that Obi-Wan Kenobi made a vow to Qui Gon Jinn to train him as a jedi.

It was also not Anakin's fault that the Jedi Council went against their own better judgement and agreed to let Kenobi train him as a Jedi.

Yet you justify the council's persecution, hostility, and suspicion against that boy on the grounds of mistakes that they made.

Prior to his embrace of the Dark Side of the Force, Anakin was not guilty of any betrayal against any Jedi.



You speak of Anakin betraying anyone "... with a modicum of class and decency..." by his conscious embrace of the Dark Side of The Force.

I agree with you.

But is it "decent" for YOU to disregard the steady victimization of an innocent 9 year old little boy with Dark Side manipulation... over 13 years? Is it "classy" to ignore the fact that this vile child abuse occurred right under the noses of the Jedi Knights who were supposed to be guiding and protecting him.

Is that fair?
Is that compassionate?
Is that the "way of the Jedi"?

You write Anakin off as "stupid", "selfish", "mean-spirited", a "jerk", etc.

But that 23 year old "stupid, selfish, mean-spirited, jerk" that you keep referring to was slowly twisted into being that way since he was a nine year old little boy by a very powerful man, with a sinister agenda, and a tremendous amount of patience.

Anakin cannot be blamed for that.

And what makes it all the more tragic was what a good, kind, courteous, helpful, humble, and decent human being he originally was.

I said earlier that I respect your point of view of this...and I do, to a
point...but really after reading your multiple messages on this, I
have to say I disagree with you SO VERY wholeheartedly on your view of the Jedi's decisions (and Obi's) vs Anakin's

Well, that’s fine. And I must certainly say the same about YOUR viewpoints: After reading them all, I most certainly disagree SO THOROUGHLY on your stance on Anakin Skywalker and your assessment of the type of individual he was.

But, as I see it, one either respects an opposing viewpoint or one does not. There really is no in-between… or “up to a point” (as you said).

What I have respected about YOUR viewpoint in this debate is your passion, and your interpretations of the facts as you have presented them (even if I did not agree with them).

But I must say that what I didn’t really have much respect for is the condescending way which you occasionally expressed your disagreement of any viewpoint that differed from your own.