Balancing of the Force?

I don't see how my ideas are outdated when nothing GL or lore has stated has explicitly said the imbalance of the Force -only- occurred during the movie ra.

However, I admit that excluding this possibility by adding conditionals not in the theory smacks of stubbornness bordering on closed mindedness. Or in laymen's, it just seems like some people refuse to consider the possibility, perhaps because it takes away from the specialness of Anakin.

It's outdated in that the old theory -- that Palpatine's machinations and actions resulted in the imbalance -- has been debunked by newer literature. Instead of a gradual process of corruption and manipulation by the Sith, it pretty much came when Plagueis and Sidious sat down and literally pushed the Force out of balance.

Is there absolute proof that that hasn't happened elsewhere? No. But it's not noted nor is there any proof of any other Sith doing anything similar.

The only thing in the EU that truly undermines Anakin's uniqueness is Dark Empire.

Fair concession. And Dark Empire runs all over of the Chosen One theory, but context is important. In his world, GL never agreed that DE ever happened. This explains why the Sith rise to prominence and die utterly in his viewpoint.

Which would probably be better tbh. Not only would Anakin's uniqueness be preserved, but let's be honest: The Sith are, by and large, dismal failures. Who on earth would willingly become one?

Palpatine, bro.

And he was extremely successful. Why would anyone else not named Palpatine want to become one?

Palpatine's machinations may have imbalanced the force even further (I think Maul implied it in when his sanity was restored in TCW), but the force was out of balance even before Palpatine's rise to chancellorship.

I'm pretty sure Mace being the first black Jedi Master on the Council upset the dark side of the Force initially.

Ahem.

Those are some light colored eyes. He's clearly from the Hindu region, bro.

New food for thought:

The Sith created Anakin to bring their version of balance to the Force by wiping out those pesky Jedi. Anakin does his job more or less, but the Force has a will of its own and is extremely passive aggressive, so it arranges for Anakin to be turned back to the light side and eliminate the Sith.

At this point, the Jedi ranks one barely knight, Luke, and no major Sith Lords of note. Some semblance of balance is achieved, although at great horrific cost and open to shifting in the future.

Additional premise: both the Sith and the Jedi think balance means destruction of one another, while the Force itself realizes duality is an unavoidable factor of life and always takes obscure measures to make sure things don't get out of hand (like noming a galaxy)

Conclusions based on additional premise: Heroes like HoT overcame Vitiate because the Force favored the elimination of a very real threat to the cosmos. Same reason why Sidious was overcome by weaklings Luke and Leia, or why Nomi was able to magically overcome Ulic's considerable Force power with an ability she had barely learned and never tested.

I disagree with Locus' intended philosophy of Star Wars.

To me, the story tells me that society can never escape the "destruction and creation" of "the balance of good and evil": that while one can exist without the other, the collective of all life that compose the society will never let it.

Obviously, balance is not the will of the Force, it is the collective of those who personify it, the life that "creates it". Dark and Light are neither good nor bad and I agree entirely with Plagueis' philosophy up to the extent that the Force is neither intrinsically good or evil. Beyond that point I oppose Plagueis' social darwinism, that the weak should be killed off, then I take up Obi-Wan's belief that the weak should be provided for by the strong...and somewhere in there I sympathize with Anakin's quest to conquer death for those he loves. Though conquering death would require him to use the dark side as a means to better the galaxy, I uphold Plagueis' belief that the Force is unbiased to the light or the dark - and as Anakin I would use my powers to provide for everyone, and allow all to grow strong and expand.

I disagree with balance entirely, and that, in place of balance, life should be allowed to create, improve, and grow abundantly so that life as the skill to assume nature's role, so that creation does not become over-cumbersome to nature. See, Potentium.

The idea of "balance of the force" was a really good one but its execution was piss poor.

My belief is impractical to George's vision, I mean, it takes the 'Wars' out of Star Wars. Creation and Destruction. Star Wars is about action, that's why I've always loved it.

It was also a bit of freshman college philosophy. Heavy lifting of Asian religions and some classic hero archetypes melded with what was originally a sci fi epic inspired by Buck Rogers.

For me, the strongest part of the OT wasn't the heavy writing or the philosophy, but the unique atmosphere. SW stood out in contrast to Star Trek, or Buck Rogers, or whathaveyou, and remained unique. The PT era just muddied the waters.