Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

In Episode 3, there are multiple points where it is obvious that Anakin is sliding toward the dark side, yet for all of their wisdom, the Jedi Council continued to push him there.

My question is, why didn't the Council (or at least Obi Wan for that matter) sense Anakin's internal conflict and confusion until it was already too late to save him?

Originally posted by jmoul
My question is, why didn't the Council (or at least Obi Wan for that matter) sense Anakin's internal conflict and confusion until it was already too late to save him?

i thought they were downright reckless for leaving his mother on tattoine. they knew he was attached so they at least they could do is offer her their protection even in the form of buying her out of slaver ffs. then to top it off yoda was fully aware of anakin slaughtering the tusken raiders and does...nothing. all he seems to do is give verbal warnings just to say "i told you so" and then goes on obvlivious.

It's almost as if these movies... don't make any sense.

Freeing her wouldn't help Anakin- it would feed into his problems. The lesson is that Anakin has to let go, and that's where he fails. You may disagree with GL's philosophy, but it is consistent.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
i thought they were downright reckless for leaving his mother on tattoine. they knew he was attached so they at least they could do is offer her their protection even in the form of buying her out of slaver ffs. then to top it off yoda was fully aware of anakin slaughtering the tusken raiders and does...nothing. all he seems to do is give verbal warnings just to say "i told you so" and then goes on obvlivious.


What Ushgarak said.

Also, no, Yoda did not know that Anakin slayed those Tuskin raiders. He got a crappy glimpse of something shitty happening. Had Yoda actually seen Anakin in his vision, while meditating, Anakin would have been immediately arrested and tried* for his crimes...just the same as they tried to do to Palps (Mace was smarter: he knew they couldn't actually try Palps).



*There is nothing in the movies to suggest that there is a separate process for Jedi. He would have been treated the same as any mass murderer.

Originally posted by dadudemon
*There is nothing in the movies to suggest that there is a separate process for Jedi. He would have been treated the same as any mass murderer. Watch the newest episode of the Clone Wars, apparently the Order internally dealing with criminal Jedi without outside interference is "tradition". Makes you root for Tarkin of all people.

nah, **** tarkin. even now he comes across as a horrible human being, imo.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Freeing her wouldn't help Anakin- it would feed into his problems. The lesson is that Anakin has to let go, and that's where he fails. You may disagree with GL's philosophy, but it is consistent.

freeing her would have put her fate in her own hands, absolving the jedi of blame. instead they left her as a slave so that if at any point she had died as a result of her servitude anakin could have easily blamed the jedi. and he would have been kinda right to.


instead the crappy angle of "obi wan i holding me back from my superpowers"


what a godawful stupid movie

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Watch the newest episode of the Clone Wars, apparently the Order internally dealing with criminal Jedi without outside interference is "tradition". Makes you root for Tarkin of all people.

This made little to no sense to me. Like...are you saying the Jedi Order punished their own Jedi gone bad before Order 66 was issued?

Originally posted by dadudemon
This made little to no sense to me. Like...are you saying the Jedi Order punished their own Jedi gone bad before Order 66 was issued?

The Jedi disciplined their own, yes.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
freeing her would have put her fate in her own hands, absolving the jedi of blame. instead they left her as a slave so that if at any point she had died as a result of her servitude anakin could have easily blamed the jedi. and he would have been kinda right to.


instead the crappy angle of "obi wan i holding me back from my superpowers"


what a godawful stupid movie

Freeing her- which they had no legal mandate to do, incidentally- would have simply validated Anakin's attachment to his mother and completely buggered up the entire philosophical basis on which they depend. It would have made Anakin worse, not better.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Freeing her- which they had no legal mandate to do, incidentally- would have simply validated Anakin's attachment to his mother and completely buggered up the entire philosophical basis on which they depend. It would have made Anakin worse, not better.

how exactly was leaving her as a slave supposed to remove anakin's already apparent attachment? wasnt suggesting he should have moved in with her. and sure they couldnt just swoop in and free her by force, but they had no problem throwing money around for the sake of fixing the ship (another dumb plot point since they could have just traded it in for another....but i digress). why couldnt they just buy her freedom? it was clear that watto was not particularly interested in keeping shmi, so he probably would have caved in on a lowball bid.

not only that but they respond to his prescient visions of his mother's murder with basically "yeah yeah its just a stupid dream. stop acting a baby"

it would not have made anakin worse to buy his mother out of slavery. thats absurd. if anything it would have relieved the anxiety and guilt of leaving her in servitude.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Freeing her- which they had no legal mandate to do, incidentally- would have simply validated Anakin's attachment to his mother and completely buggered up the entire philosophical basis on which they depend. It would have made Anakin worse, not better. They didn't need to have her living with Anakin, but they certainly could have given him ease of mind by buying her, and setting her up somewhere on some peaceful world in the Republic. Teaching the ultimate Force pupil that the Order is willing to allow even his mother to wallow in slavery, while simultaneously propping up virtuous behavior and the pursuit of truth and justice, is more than a tad contradictory. It would give anyone pause to doubt and question.

Buying her freedom is funding slavers and completely illegal- what a ridiculous move for them to make. They had absolutely no power or right to intervene on Tatooine at all. You seem to be basing your ideas on the Jedi wielding executive power- they are actually a police force.

And yes, leaving her there does cause Anakin difficulties. Yoda didn't even want him trained at all. But the bottom line was that every other option was worse, as it validates Anakin's attachment and buggers up the idea of letting go. If you don't think that's true, that's because you don't buy GL's philosophy, but again, it is consistently presented in the story.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Buying her freedom is funding slavers and completely illegal- what a ridiculous move for them to make. They had absolutely no power or right to intervene on Tatooine at all. You seem to be basing your idea on the Jedi like they wield executive power- they are actually a police force. So wait... it's against Republic law to intervene on non-Republic worlds. And it's against Republic law to go to those worlds and engage in their economy?



Where is this stated in the movie?

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Buying her freedom is funding slavers and completely illegal- what a ridiculous move for them to make. They had absolutely no power or right to intervene on Tatooine at all.

*except when using the force+gambling to cheat watto out of his property and place a child in mortal danger for material gain.




Originally posted by Ushgarak
You seem to be basing your ideas on the Jedi wielding executive power- they are actually a police force.

And yes, leaving her there does cause Anakin difficulties. Yoda didn't even want him trained at all. But the bottom line was that every other option was worse, as it validates Anakin's attachment and buggers up the idea of letting go. If you don't think that's true, that's because you don't buy GL's philosophy, but again, it is consistently presented in the story.

never suggested executive power or even the simple act of intimidation. just a simple purchase. why was it ok to finagle in order to win anakin and a ship part?

well thats the thing isnt it? we have to buy a philosophy that is convoluted in order to accept it. stepping back from the forced set of silly and hypocritical ethics of the PT jedi, do you feel it made sense?

If by 'engaging in their economy' you mean 'buying slaves' then yes, I would imagine that is completely illegal, and by the same token the Jedi had no mandate to interfere politically on Tatooine- they'd need political assent, which simply would never come. Do you think the NYPD can go and rescue political prisoners in Syria?

Originally posted by focus4chumps
*except when using the force+gambling to cheat watto out of his property and place a child in mortal danger for material gain.






well thats the thing isnt it? we have to buy a philosophy that is convoluted in order to accept it. stepping back from the forced set of silly and hypocritical ethics of the PT jedi, do you feel it made sense?

You are mistaking Qui-Gon for the Jedi. Qui-Gon's whole point is that he was a rule-breaking maverick who caused problems. Even so, he showed clear limits.

Personally, whilst his beliefs are not my own, I think GL's beliefs are one of the few things he clearly and logically presents on-screen. I don;t see them as conculuted or silly at all.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
ou are mistaking Qui-Gon for the Jedi. Qui-Gon;s whole point is that he was a rule-breaking maverick who caused problems.

ok, thats a good point. although it makes qui-gon look like a real jerk considering what he did vs. what he didnt do...especially since he was kinda flirty with shmi. man what a jerk.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Personally, whilst his beliefs are not my own, I think GL's beliefs are one of the few things he clearly and logically presents on-screen. I don;t see them as conculuted or silly at all.

they threw anakin in a one-size-fits-all education refusing to take into consideration that he may need special treatment/arrangement.

they didnt have to be so anal about their philosophy, especially since holding strict to it proved reckless.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
If by 'engaging in their economy' you mean 'buying slaves' then yes, I would imagine that is completely illegal It's fine to do business with known slavers and utilize his child slaves in a dodgy and dangerous gambling deal, but it's not okay to buy a slave and set her free? Not even for the purpose of securing the ease of mind and loyalty of one of the most powerful and "dangerous" Force users ever?


You know if the movie had flat out said as much, I'd have called it totally retarded, but at least it explained itself. But when it omits all sense of logic and explanation, and forces us to, as you put it, "imagine" in order to justify horrendous inconsistencies, then game over, man. Game over.

Well, Qui-Gon IS a bit of a jerk, and even GL talks about how dangerous what he did was. On the other hand, he instinctively knew that Anakin was so important as to justify the liberty.

-

I don't think holding to their philosophy proved reckless- on the contrary, that they remained true to their highly altruistic ideals speaks very highly of the Jedi indeed. Anakin went wrong, but from the start that was a known risk of training him. I doubt there was any better approach, with the possible exception of how Obi-Wan treated him, which he did later say he got wrong.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
It's fine to do business with known slavers and utilize his child slaves in a dodgy and dangerous gambling deal, but it's not okay to buy a slave and set her free? Not even for the purpose of securing the ease of mind and loyalty of one of the most powerful and "dangerous" Force users ever?


You know if the movie had flat out said as much, I'd have called it totally retarded, but at least it explained itself. But when it omits all sense of logic and explanation, and forces us to, as you put it, "imagine" in order to justify horrendous inconsistencies, then game over, man. Game over.

Again, you are mistaking QGJ for the Jedi. No, what he did was not fine at all and could never have been officially sanctioned.

Yes, even for that reason. It was practically, legally and politically impossible for the Jedi to do anything on Tatooine, not to mention that doing it would be completely against the vital philosophy and would bugger up Anakin even worse.

Actually I disagree. Unlike some elements of Star Wars lore- like the Living Force, the Sith and Balance- this one is pretty obvious. You just need to gt out of this weird and utterly unrealistic mindset of what the Jedi are and what they can do. It is very clear they they are a police force and not some sort of self-appointed rulers who can do whatever they like.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Again, you are mistaking QGJ for the Jedi. No, what he did was not fine at all and could never have been officially sanctioned.

Yes, even for that reason. It was practically, legally and politically impossible for the Jedi to do anything on Tatooine, not to mention that doing it would be completely against the vital philosophy and would bugger up Anakin even worse. Beyond your own explanation of what happens, when do the films actually say any of that? I mean, all of that would be a perfectly fine excuse, but no one actually explains anything. We do. The fans, I mean. But not one line of dialogue actually tells us why his mother was kept in bondage. Why the Jedi don't (or can't) intervene. No Jedi or Senator ever balked at Qui-Gon dealing with slavers. Not even Obi-Wan. As far as the movies show us, the Jedi actually don't care one way or the other. They're presented as apathetic to the issue of slavery. Maybe even ignorant of it. Only Padme and Anakin are ever shown to be adverse to it.


No wonder Anakin had a skewed view of things. The Order didn't even notice.

Again, I disagree- I think the ethical and political realities of the situation are not unclear in the film. It is clear that the Jedi are a police force, so your logic is backwards. It's the default to assume they have no power to intervene outside the Republic; you;d have to establish that it is said somewhere they they CAN. Likewise, the priority of Anakin to let go and forget about his mother is also made exceptionally clear, and by that same logic, rescuing Anakin's mother would be very dangerous for him. Btw, I think the Jedi clearly did diapprove at what QGJ did.

They don't intervene because it's not in the Republic. Again, your whole perspective on the burden of proof here is backwards. Again, this is like my 'NYPD intervening in Syria' example- it's too obvious to need spelling out. They don't like slavery, but what possible legal power do they have to do anything about it? The film is clear that the Republic did not exist at Tatooine, and its laws with it.

right ush, but i think you're confusing "no attachment" to "completely cold-blooded detatchment".

to just expect him to all of the sudden be like "shmi? whats a shmi?" after leaving is silly. not calling your assessment silly, i think you are accurately portraying GL's philosophy, but i think he went bat**** silly. his philosophy is ok on the surface but they coldly press it so hard and absolute until it completely defies logic.

No, I don't think I am confusing that at all actually. And th difficulty of doing it is precisely why Yoda didn't want him trained and, before Maul turned up at the end of TPM, neither did the Council. Everyone knew it was very risky at that age.

I also very strongly disagree that, as portrayed, it defies logic. On the contrary, I think what happened validates everything they said. If they had rescued Shmi and Anakin had been fine, that would have undermined the whole thing. As it is, the whole presentation is that the Jedi simply have to be hard line, and there is no better option.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
If they had rescued Shmi and Anakin had been fine, that would have undermined the whole thing.

luke defied yoda and ben and refused to kill vader. he also had attachment toward leia and han, which he defied yoda in maintaining. there is a running them about defying and undermining the jedi and it always seems to turn out ok. they tell luke vader is beyond redemption and luke undermines them. when the jedi were in control and held strict sway over their own, it just seemed they were blind, stupid, and ineffectual and rotting in their own dogma.

Actually Luke's recklessness in ESB is portrayed as near disastrous. With the single exception of Vader's redemption- the culmination of the entire saga and a singular point the hero is intended to make- GL's beliefs as expressed through the Jedi seem very reasonably and consistently presented to me.

It only turned out okay because of sheer luck, not any one person's determination.

Luke royally ****ed things up by going after Vader, and if it wasn't through sheer fortune that his suicide dive took him somewhere the falcon got him, and Lando's morals kicking in.

I doubt even Luke felt vindicated.

fair enough. esb was a mistake for luke

now for vader's redemption. what was the better traditional jedi way of dealing with that?

i just cant buy that it was all quigon's or even obiwan's fault.

the whole jedi council was complicit in their recklessness in allowing all the stress on anakin to continue, especially yoda/mace. but no, they gave him a job spying on the person they fear might be in league with him, effectively handing palps his own inside agent. it was a RECKLESS gamble.

then they try to take down the sith lord with enough jedi to fit comfortably in a mid-size car. "no thats ok, you all just chill at the temple. sure our most basic purpose is to prevent exactly this *once in a millenium* person from succeeding, and sure he has command of the clone army, but we got this. oh where's anakin? you know our most powerful jedi who we suspect is twisted? oh nevermind im sure he wont turn up. probably babysitting the younglings again"

well that turned into quite a rant

It was a lousy plot, let's face it.

The point was to show that Anakin made his own choices and this those choices led him to the dark side.
But to me, Anakin was a grumpy arrogant brat when we first saw him in AOTC... so somewhere is his teens he already changed into a very f****d up guy... Bad storytelling, peeps.

Originally posted by queeq
It was a lousy plot, let's face it.

The point was to show that Anakin made his own choices and this those choices led him to the dark side.
But to me, Anakin was a grumpy arrogant brat when we first saw him in AOTC... so somewhere is his teens he already changed into a very f****d up guy... Bad storytelling, peeps.

yeah. plus, one thing that always struck me was that in ROTS, Obi-Wan tells Anakin that the council wants him to spy on the chancellor, yet moments later, we see Mace Windu tell them how ****ing bad an idea it is.

So whose idea was it? I can't see Yoda going for something like that either, so a majority vote, or something?

As queeq says, that was a lousy plot. My point is not that it is brilliant, it is simply that it was internally logically consistent, which is more than can be said for a lot of concepts that GL failed to put on film. The main issue here with the fundamental so the idea is not that GL failed to explain what he meant, it's just that most people don't agree with him.

In all honesty, though, I welcome his take. I wish it was done better, but I still welcome it. We are stuck in a horrible meta-narrative in Hollywood films where authority is wrong, individuality trumps discipline and love conquers all things. Star Wars is one of the few mainstream cultural pieces that actually says- perhaps you should listen to authority, and love actually cocks things up sometimes. Whether you agree or not, I think we should all want more stories like that, if nothing else because the opposite idea is weakened if it's not even being made part of a debate.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
right ush, but i think you're confusing "no attachment" to "completely cold-blooded detatchment".

Actually, I believe it is the same. What is at all "happy" or "normal" about detaching yourself from your family, completely, and joining a monk order? It really is "cold-bloded detachment", as you put it.


Originally posted by focus4chumps
fair enough. esb was a mistake for luke

now for vader's redemption. what was the better traditional jedi way of dealing with that?

I took, as well as millions of other fans took, the whole Jedi philosophy thing to be slightly flawed. Luke's attachments made him come out on top, in the end. The EU took that concept and ran with it. But to directly answer your question: it is invalid/irrelevant. The Force itself redeemed Anakin as he was able to come back as a force ghost. So whatever the Jedi would have thought about Vader's redemption is kind of irrelevant to what the "god" of the Star Wars universe thought. If you think what the Jedi thought would be contrary to what the force "thought", the Jedi would be wrong. If you think they would agree with what the force "thought", they'd be right.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
As queeq says, that was a lousy plot. My point is not that it is brilliant, it is simply that it was internally logically consistent, which is more than can be said for a lot of concepts that GL failed to put on film. The main issue here with the fundamental so the idea is not that GL failed to explain what he meant, it's just that most people don't agree with him.

In all honesty, though, I welcome his take. I wish it was done better, but I still welcome it. We are stuck in a horrible meta-narrative in Hollywood films where authority is wrong, individuality trumps discipline and love conquers all things. Star Wars is one of the few mainstream cultural pieces that actually says- perhaps you should listen to authority, and love actually cocks things up sometimes. Whether you agree or not, I think we should all want more stories like that, if nothing else because the opposite idea is weakened if it's not even being made part of a debate.

Agreed about the consistency.

Lucas, even though I can fault him for certain things in his movies, has always been a pretty solid ideas man, and he made it pretty clear, I felt, that Jedi=good, Sith=bad in these movies.

And i was genuinely asking about the council thing, in case I missed something.

It's unclear; most of the Council is nebulous, Who outvoted Yoda about training Anakin in TPM? Windu hardly seemed in favour either. Maybe it is all Ki-Adi Mundi's fault. He's grumpy because he got blown up right at the start of TPM.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
It's unclear; most of the Council is nebulous, Who outvoted Yoda about training Anakin in TPM? Windu hardly seemed in favour either. Maybe it is all Ki-Adi Mundi's fault. He's grumpy because he got blown up right at the start of TPM.

Wait; he got blown up?

Silas Carson played the pilot on QGJ's ship.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Silas Carson played the pilot on QGJ's ship.

Well damn, I didn't know that.

No wonder he's grumpy.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
would bugger up Anakin even worse.

Where are you getting that from? I think it would be pretty hard to be buggered up worse than massacring women and children in a fit of murderous rage. And why? How would knowing that his mum was safe negatively affect him? Because it would validate his attachment to her? I'm going to have to agree with Queeq here, thats stupid. He's already attached to her and they know it. Not acknowledging it won't make it go away. If however they put his mind at ease about her then he can stop worrying about her and focus on his Jedi training, allowing him to lose his emotional baggage and get into a position where he can detach himself from her.

I'm not disagreeing with you about Jedi philosophy or saying that the Jedi have the authority to free slaves outside the Republic, but imo the Council should have made an exception in this case. Anakin being trained in the first place is an exception, a dangerous one at that. I don't see why making another one to minimize the risk could do anything but help the situation.

I think Ush is just trying to bring some sense to an otherwise nonsensical plot. Problem is that we shouldn't be the ones to come up with reasons and logic, that should be the the movie's job. It doesn't even begin to hint that moral or ethical quandaries are involved when it comes to Anakin's mother. Her freedom isn't even discussed, and it should have been, even if it was vetoed.


Poor storytelling, plain and simple.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Where are you getting that from? I think it would be pretty hard to be buggered up worse than massacring women and children in a fit of murderous rage. And why? How would knowing that his mum was safe negatively affect him? Because it would validate his attachment to her? I'm going to have to agree with Queeq here, thats stupid. He's already attached to her and they know it. Not acknowledging it won't make it go away. If however they put his mind at ease about her then he can stop worrying about her and focus on his Jedi training, allowing him to lose his emotional baggage and get into a position where he can detach himself from her.

I'm not disagreeing with you about Jedi philosophy or saying that the Jedi have the authority to free slaves outside the Republic, but imo the Council should have made an exception in this case. Anakin being trained in the first place is an exception, a dangerous one at that. I don't see why making another one to minimize the risk could do anything but help the situation.

See, this is again about the fundamentals of GL's philosophy. Anakin fails here because he cannot let go. It's not about worrying less, it is about completely letting go, regardless of possible danger. Attachment leads to the Dark Side. By rescuing his mother, they would be validating his attachment, That makes him MORE likely to go to the Dark Side, not less, and it could have been anyone he started slaughtering, and it could have been much sooner and with far less provocation needed than having to see his mother tortured and dying. You say 'make an exception' as if this would be some special privilege. He's not meant to let go as some kind of self-discipline lesson; it's an essential part of not turning evil. 'Making an exception' equates to 'bring on the Dark Side'. As it is, it went wrong (to be fair, he was never meant to return to Tatpoine and the timing of what happened was immensely unlucky). But validating his attachment would not have prevented his fall, it would have made it more likely. Hence it would be a very stupid thing to do, even if it was within their legal power.

That's how GL holds it. You let go; you do NOTHING about it. Doing anything about it is acting on fear and fatal. The job of the Jedi was not to validate Anakin's fears, but to teach him to overcome them. So this comes down again to people not agreeing with GL.

I think these particular points are not particularly speculative. The film is very clear on the problem.

i admit a sharp bias since the only way i can digest the PT is under the conclusion that the old jedi order failed. they were not simply outmaneuvered and defeated, but also caught in the perpetual state of complete incompetence, complacency, naive aloofness, and vulnerability to the very entity that they were likely formed to defend against.

the jedi are supposed to be compassionate, yet rarely show it in the PT. they should have at least attempted to arrange for shmi's freedom since she allowed her only child to risk his life to help them. you cant apply the jedi code of ethics to a purely dick move.

"sorry shmi, but we'll be off convincing your son not to care about you and will be leaving you as a slave. it is our way. thanks for all the help. lulz"

You certainly can apply it when, in the setting, it is a. not a dick move and b. the practically and ethically correct thing to do.

i guess we're at a dead end here if you are set on this idea that shmi was fairly treated. but i'm not budging on this either since i find it to be ethically abominable to abandon a hero to slavery. (she was a slave after all and she did kinda give up all she had to save their butts.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
i guess we're at a dead end here if you are set on this idea that shmi was fairly treated. but i'm not budging on this either since i find it to be ethically abominable to abandon a hero to slavery. (she was a slave after all and she did kinda give up all she had to save their butts.

I don't think anyone is saying that Schmi was fairly treated...only that the Jedi's logic/traditions were internally consistent with George's vision of how the Order operated.

All of us are in agreement that Watto should have been Force Raped and Schmi removed from his "care".

Originally posted by dadudemon

All of us are in agreement that Watto should have been Force Raped and Schmi removed from his "care".
thanks again ddm, but i think we can handle ourselves fine without you holding our hands.

and you are wrong. ush is suggesting that leaving her behind as a slave was the:

the practically and ethically correct thing to do.

he believes it not only falls in line with their philosophy but was pretty much imperative given the circumstances, and i am disagreeing with him. thats when you came in, attempting to needlessly mediate a discussion which you barely even skimmed through.

Personally I think it would only be right to go free Shimi if they were going to go on a mission to free all the slaves on Tatooine.

Otherwise if they went back just to save Shimi just for Skywalker to feel better then that wouldn't exactly be an action that was done because "It was the righteous thing to do."

my argument has nothing to do with freeing slaves, but rather returning a favor...probably the most profound favor from anyone in the saga. yet they leave her as owned property which could easily be sold to any random hutt for a life of sorrow, violence, and possible rape and eventual rancor food. not cool jedi. NOT COOL.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
thanks again ddm, but i think we can handle ourselves fine without you holding our hands.

and you are wrong. ush is suggesting that leaving her behind as a slave was the:


Looks like you need a bit more help to understand that quote you took out of context. Let me hold your hand just a bit more, so you can understand what exactly he was saying, there:


Originally posted by Ushgarak
You certainly can apply it when, in the setting...

Emphasis mine.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
he believes it not only falls in line with their philosophy but was pretty much imperative given the circumstances, and i am disagreeing with him. thats when you came in, attempting to needlessly mediate a discussion which you barely even skimmed through.

Tantrum, much?

You know, I would not respond to you so condescendingly if you would...not do so from the get go. You could have gone about your reply with far less words and in a far kinder way.

You could have just said, "I don't think Ushgarak believes that, dadudemon, because he posted this, here:"

Just a tip on how to post more like an adult.

its not my fault that you jumped the gun.

you could have just read the exchange which you wished to mediate and profess expertise on.

i suspect (admittedly hope) that ep7 kills the debate on jedi and family, considering the next skywalker generation.

or else its "sorry mom and dad, but its our way" as they send han and leia off to some dingy low-budget galatic nursing home and never even call them. come to think of it that would be funny.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
its not my fault that you jumped the gun.

you could have just read the exchange which you wished to mediate and profess expertise on.

You clearly did not read my post or else you would not have posted what you did, here. Go back to read my post to see where you went wrong.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
i suspect (admittedly hope) that ep7 kills the debate on jedi and family, considering the next skywalker generation.

Well...that's what they did in the EU.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
i suspect (admittedly hope) that ep7 kills the debate on jedi and family, considering the next skywalker generation.

or else its "sorry mom and dad, but its our way" as they send han and leia off to some dingy low-budget galatic nursing home and never even call them. come to think of it that would be funny.

Absolutely. Ep7 has a chance to redress many balances and this does need perspective added.

Maybe we see Luke going from more balanced, warmer principles rather than "Oh this order demands that I turn my back on my family and let my Mom get fingered by sandpeople".

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Absolutely. Ep7 has a chance to redress many balances and this does need perspective added.


the family issue kinda has to be addressed or its may turn out as a contradiction to the PT. it may just involve luke teaching the kids that over-attachment is dangerous as it can lead one to be manipulated down the dark path out of despiration, however its going to be pretty lame if they dont express a need to rescue eachother (if they are about to be fingered by sand people, for example).

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Maybe we see Luke going from more balanced, warmer principles rather than "Oh this order demands that I turn my back on my family and let my Mom get fingered by sandpeople".

i think yoda and ben hinted at a shift in jedi protocol in terms of family attachment.

even when ben obviously suspect that luke could be manipulated by vader through his feelings for his sister, he implores luke to bury those feelings, but he also stated "they do you credit".

yoda encourages luke to "pass on what he has learned" to his family. while he left that very vague (talking about leia? leia's kids? lukes kids?) its clear that he is encouraging a family dynamic. (well not TOO close)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v63/BlueDelvia/Star%20Wars%20spoofs/sainappropriate.jpg

Yeah I'd agree with that..

LOL That pic..! Perfectly encapsulating the horror...!!

Superb it is, yeeeees.

i couldnt find a better resolution so, i made one. (using it on FB timeline banner) tough part was finding the face, which is from after he saves luke from the tusken raiders and is like "ooobiwaan...".

http://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/u561/focus4chumps/2_zpsd5ba32bc.jpg

I like the video where it shows han realising it, personally.

This one?

ehEkCYjnLJ8

yup.

haha

Hilarious

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Again, I disagree- I think the ethical and political realities of the situation are not unclear in the film. It is clear that the Jedi are a police force, so your logic is backwards. It's the default to assume they have no power to intervene outside the Republic; you;d have to establish that it is said somewhere they they CAN....
They don't intervene because it's not in the Republic. Again, your whole perspective on the burden of proof here is backwards. Again, this is like my 'NYPD intervening in Syria' example- it's too obvious to need spelling out. They don't like slavery, but what possible legal power do they have to do anything about it? The film is clear that the Republic did not exist at Tatooine, and its laws with it.

Hello, Ushgarak, everybody. I'm new to this site, but find these discussions fascinating. I have wondered about a couple of illogical points in the PT. Let's look at the clarity of the Jedi ethical realities. Here is a quote from TPM:

Qui-Gon Jinn: I can only protect you, I cannot fight a war for you.
Yet, in AotC Yoda comes flying in to save the day with an armada of ships and troops. I always found that ironic.

Then there's this interaction between Anakin and his Mother.
Shmi Skywalker: What does your heart tell you?
Anakin: I hope so. Yes... I guess.
Shmi Skywalker: Then we will see each other again.
Anakin: I will come back and free you, Mom. I promise.
Shmi Skywalker: Now, be brave, and don't look back. Don't look back.

Why doesn't he come back and free her? He's standing next to QGJ as he says this. Don't you think for the next 10 years he would spend every waking moment thinking of a way and working toward freeing his mother? Even QGJ tries to buy her freedom:

Anakin: But what about mom? Is she free too? You're coming too, aren't you mom?
Qui-Gon Jinn: I tried to free your mother Anni, but Watto wouldn't have it.

I see too many examples of inconsistency in the Jedi ethics to explain it away. If they are so true to these ethics, why does Yoda assault Geonosis? Why does Mace Windu throw out the book when he goes to arrest Palpatine. Yes, there are reasons why these extremes occurred, but freeing Anakin's enslaved mother is another extreme that can be justified like the others. At least Anakin could've saved his money and done it himself, he could've snuck by Tatooine and picked her up on his way to Naboo (if she wasn't captured yet..) and given her a home there, the Jedi Council none the wiser.

the way he turned to the Dark side in the movie was over a bad dream! It wasn't as much that for his motivation to switch sides that bothered me as much as it was he just willynilly agreed to kill everyone palpatine told him to.
The character of Anakin was written so horribly in the prequels.
The way Obi-Won spoke about him in the originals we all thought he was this great guy, who was tragically seduced by the dark side.
Then Lucas wrote him as a whiney selfish arsehole, and i thought "seems like he's on the dark side already"
His seduction should have been a build up of a nice guy who is having bad things going on in his life that he feels helpless, feels betrayed by the Jedi and seeks out the power of the Dark side to try and heal his problems.

Originally posted by jmoul
In Episode 3, there are multiple points where it is obvious that Anakin is sliding toward the dark side, yet for all of their wisdom, the Jedi Council continued to push him there.

My question is, why didn't the Council (or at least Obi Wan for that matter) sense Anakin's internal conflict and confusion until it was already too late to save him?

Cause the Jedi in the prequels are dumb ,and can't see through the dark side of the force