StarDestroyer.Net BBS

As far as animosity extends to relationships in the EU, Luke's relationship and later marriage to a woman who was previously ordered and to kill him by the Emperor is interesting, as is Corran Horn's to Mirax, (His father arrested her father, a smuggler, and sent him to Kessel.)

Angst aside, Corran's theoughts on attachment and the force as he wrestles with his own morality in I, Jedi were pretty interesting.

How do you think these relationships and or the characters' personalities compare to Anakin's?

DrMckay wrote: How do you think these relationships and or the characters' personalities compare to Anakin's?

Easy, Luke and Corran have managed to deal with their attachments better than Anakin did, and it is to their credit as Jedi that with the power they wield they have so far not given into the Dark Side despite the numerous threats posed to their families. Luke even managed to restrain himself from killing Jacen Solo even though Luke knew that it was Jacen that killed Mara. There have been a number of Jedi though from Luke Skywalker's NJO that have not had the strength to deal with their loss or jealousy in a smiliar manner though.

Anakin also had Palpatine's manipulations working against him as well, Palpatine actively sought to heighten Anakin's fears of losing Padme by making it so that he was stuck in the Outer Rim for a long time during the Clone Wars.

DrMckay wrote:Er. Weren't some of the factors in Anakin's fall his screwy upbringing?

Possibly, but I doubt it. I've said it before; Anakin is shown as his most responsible, caring, intelligent, and well adjusted in TPM. He basically was an awesome kid. He had friends and hobbies and even had a somewhat decent relationship with his slavemaster. He had a very good relationship with his mom, and apparently the community around him.

What I have also said before is that Anakin was in Palpatine's realm of influence from the time he first met him, and I find it highly likely that the biggest cause of Anakin's fall is this direct influence.

Being a slave with an explosive device implanted in him throughout his childhood, Anakin is then taken away from his mother at the age of nine, and joins an (essentially religious order) which abducts and indoctrinates children from a young age?

Why do people fuck this up. Anakin was NOT TAKEN. He made the choice to go with the Jedi. It was his dream, figuratively and literally that he would one day become a Jedi. Shmi let him go, on his own volition, because she knew that he was far beyond just special and that she could never give him the life that she felt he deserved.

As a side... were are all these examples of Jedi "abductions" I hear about? I admit that I haven't read much of the prequel era EU, but I have never read anything about this.

It seems likely that if anything, growing up outside the insular Jedi Temple enabled him to be exposed to other methods of living than your average brainwashed Jedi.

I'm sorry, but which Jedi are brainwashed again? Obi-Wan? Qui-Gonn? Mace? Ki-Adi-Mundi? Yoda? They all have completely separate ways of thinking and even ideas on the Force. How many times do Jedi reference Padawans either others or themselves acting out? This uniformity and brainwashing that people speak of when it comes to the Jedi just sounds like a bunch of made up, unsupported bullshit. Quite frankly, it sounds like a lot of people have been drinking too much of Palpatine's Kool-Aid.

Oh, and on that note, aside from their neutral stance,and the whole Force telepathy/empathy thing, how are Jedi considered the BEST negotiators in the galaxy if they are raised in an insular temple from infancy, never leaving, and given little exposure to other cultures until being assigned a master.

As opposed to the one way of living that Anakin experienced on Tattooine? Come on. Padawans are assigned to masters at around 12 years old or so. What kid sees the world before then anyway? It seems like a Jedi Padawan is exposed to more cultures in one year than most people will see in their lifetimes. As far as being good negotiators, IMO it would be beneficial to not be attached to one culture in this capacity as it allows for true impartiality in the job. Also, I would think that they are instructed in some sort of negotiation techniques from Masters that have been there and done that, although that is pure speculation on my part.

I don't think the prequel Jedi ideals/codes turn out well-balanced individuals. The separation from a family or society structure from a very young age, and the options of marriage and/or procreation being forbidden leaves them incapable of empathizing with or investing in (children) the society they so nobly swore to protect. It seems they only protect the average sentient out of some sense of noblesse oblige to the "less gifted" inhabitants of the society.

Again, care to at least give an example of all the not well-balanced individuals the Jedi Order is pumping out? And clearly, there is a family type structure in the Jedi Order. Masters act as Fathers and Mothers to Padawans. Knights consider each other brothers and sisters. They care about each other, depend on each other, live together. Sounds like a family to me, or did we all of a sudden decide that only *cough*traditional families*cough* can raise a healthy, mentally stable, well balanced child? And as stated, the Jedi's responsibility is to the Republic and the Senate and through that, average Joe citizen, not directly to Joe himself.

In my opinion, separating such powerful individuals from any society (in this case through restrictive internal codes and rules) has a large potential to either render them outcast in society, and cause them to view themselves as Superior and not a part of the culture, leading to trouble down the road.

I will grant you that quite a few of the Jedi we have seen certainly consider themselves superior to the average citizen, but that is true of any group of people that have power. Why we think that the Jedi are not allowed flaws or are not people first is beyond me. From the first Jedi we see, Obi-Wan, we know that they are not perfect and make mistakes just like anyone else. Jedi=Perfect is some sort of brainbug or whatever you call it. As

Seems like it's kinda like not letting priests marry; when you conflict with a biological imperative/instinct, the rules become secondary.

I'm not sure where you are going here.

havokeff wrote:Possibly, but I doubt it. I've said it before; Anakin is shown as his most responsible, caring, intelligent, and well adjusted in TPM. He basically was an awesome kid. He had friends and hobbies and even had a somewhat decent relationship with his slavemaster. He had a very good relationship with his mom, and apparently the community around him.

Anakin's childhood does indeed appear to have been remarkably happy when the circumstances are taken into account; young Anakin's mental health and adjustment would not be in dispute. It is how the Jedi upbringing he received thereafter affected him that is the point of contention.

What I have also said before is that Anakin was in Palpatine's realm of influence from the time he first met him, and I find it highly likely that the biggest cause of Anakin's fall is this direct influence.

How influenced could he reasonably have been, growing up as a youngling/apprentice? It is not like Ben Kenobi was seconded to Palpatine's personal staff. Their contact would be infrequent at best.

Why do people fuck this up. Anakin was NOT TAKEN. He made the choice to go with the Jedi. It was his dream, figuratively and literally that he would one day become a Jedi.

Yes, clearly a nine-year-old without any formal education whatsoever whose only knowledge of the Jedi Order comes from spacers' fairytales is able to make the informed decision of entering an ascetic religious order . . .

Shmi let him go, on his own volition, because she knew that he was far beyond just special and that she could never give him the life that she felt he deserved.

Because a life in the Jedi Order is better and more fulfilling than one on Tatooine; Jedi are so much richer and lead so much nicer lives, living longer and healthier.

As a side... were are all these examples of Jedi "abductions" I hear about? I admit that I haven't read much of the prequel era EU, but I have never read anything about this.

Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader goes the most indepth, as far as I know, though it is annoyingly vague at times. Jedi vs Sith: The Essential Guide to the Force explicitly mentions the Order's policy of "conscripting" infants. For details on a particular, albeit somewhat exceptional, case, see the HoloNet News mock-ups on the "Baby Ludi" case from the official page; these are still online and fairly easily found through Wookiee's links. For the most blatant examples of the Order recruiting and employing child-soldiers see the story told (from differing perspectives) in Jedi vs Sith (the comic) and Darth Bane: Path of Destruction. There are a couple of others, but these should be the primary ones.

I'm sorry, but which Jedi are brainwashed again? Obi-Wan? Qui-Gonn? Mace? Ki-Adi-Mundi? Yoda? They all have completely separate ways of thinking and even ideas on the Force. How many times do Jedi reference Padawans either others or themselves acting out? This uniformity and brainwashing that people speak of when it comes to the Jedi just sounds like a bunch of made up, unsupported bullshit. Quite frankly, it sounds like a lot of people have been drinking too much of Palpatine's Kool-Aid.

Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader and various other sources describe the upbringing of the younglings, who lead a cloistered existence in the main Temple and whose only contacts are their Jedi supervisors. Rare visits to the outside worlds show them something described as so different that they cannot relate to it. These years in their youth, they are trained in Jedi doctrine, simple Force training and little else; slips of anger (such as what happened to the young Ben Kenobi in the Jedi Apprentice serie) are punished in varying degrees, ultimately with expulsion to the AgriCorps (effectively a sentence to hard labour, from the description of Ben's work). Whether this is "brainwashing" in the literal sense may perhaps be debated.

As opposed to the one way of living that Anakin experienced on Tattooine? Come on. Padawans are assigned to masters at around 12 years old or so. What kid sees the world before then anyway? It seems like a Jedi Padawan is exposed to more cultures in one year than most people will see in their lifetimes. As far as being good negotiators, IMO it would be beneficial to not be attached to one culture in this capacity as it allows for true impartiality in the job. Also, I would think that they are instructed in some sort of negotiation techniques from Masters that have been there and done that, although that is pure speculation on my part.

Yes; the Jedi are culturally neutral enough to think that cannibalism is acceptable if it is part of a culture. Even when it is members of the Order who are eaten.

Again, care to at least give an example of all the not well-balanced individuals the Jedi Order is pumping out? And clearly, there is a family type structure in the Jedi Order. Masters act as Fathers and Mothers to Padawans. Knights consider each other brothers and sisters. They care about each other, depend on each other, live together. Sounds like a family to me, or did we all of a sudden decide that only *cough*traditional families*cough* can raise a healthy, mentally stable, well balanced child?

Yet the Master who let Colicoids eat his apprentice was commended for showing restraint and detachement in not punishing them for it and held up as an example to the rest of the Order. His justification was, in paraphrase, that "while eating the flesh of sentient is not prohibited by the Jedi Code, to Colicoids, not eating the flesh of sentient beings is a sign of insanity". So, their culture was worth more than this "father's" supposed "son". Yes, there we have sound family values.

And as stated, the Jedi's responsibility is to the Republic and the Senate and through that, average Joe citizen, not directly to Joe himself.

Jedi are not (prior to Palpatine's reforms) subject to the Senate in any direct fashion, and at least the bulk of the evidence points towards them having jurisdiction over their own members; the Senate regulates their interactions with the Supreme Chancellor's office, and exercises more indirect control through the funding they choose to grant the Jedi (though state grants are not the Order's sole source of income).

I will grant you that quite a few of the Jedi we have seen certainly consider themselves superior to the average citizen, but that is true of any group of people that have power. Why we think that the Jedi are not allowed flaws or are not people first is beyond me. From the first Jedi we see, Obi-Wan, we know that they are not perfect and make mistakes just like anyone else. Jedi=Perfect is some sort of brainbug or whatever you call it. As

I believe that he is pointing out that their structure isolates them from society, not that this originates with their power. Which makes sense, as they are raised in isolation and to be loyal to the Order and its creed.

Darth Fanboy wrote:Shifiting the goalposts a little bit? Here is what you said earlier:

I do maintain that that would be the logical endpoint of the axioms that Anakin named, without qualifiers, when he gave his explanation to Senator Amidala. This would also tend to be supported by the EU; I seem to recall one Jedi being disciplined for being attached to the Republic. (At the moment, however, I cannot remember the source, so I shall not press that point now.) But in that specific paragraph, I was referring primarily to sexual relationships, since that appeared to be the main contention.

Again, this all falls back on how you are interpreting attachments. BEcause in the increidbly literal way YOU are viewing it, then the entire Jedi Order is hypocritical based on the inherent bonds felt between teachers and students that their own system provides, as well as the camaraderie of other members of the order and the closed community they live in. It is a much simpler explanation that the term "attachment" refers to a Jedi's ability to let go of the things he or she cherishes most and not to selfishly cling to them as they pass out of his or her life.

Would the Master/Padawan I quoted be a good example of that? The argument is that, like Abraham, Jedi can have children as long as they are prepared to sacrifice them when God or the Jedi Code tells them to?

Remember when Anakin went to seek Yoda's counsel in RoTS. Yoda never chastised Anakin for having close relationships, which Anakin admitted to, Yoda simply warned Anakin of the danger of not being able to let go of those relationships. "Mourn them do not, miss them do not." Nothing about not caring for others.

If you neither miss nor mourn one who dies, you did not care for her to begin with. Yoda has unreasonable expectations on Anakin, even accepting your line of argumentation. Anakin was also rather less than forthright with the details in his confession, and furthermore Yoda was one of the more liberal Jedi who was not necessarily comfortable with the system (one notes the striking differences between the Order's teachings and what he taught Luke in Ep V, and furthermore that he was the one Master to utter reservations when the High Council plotted to take over the Republic in the Ep III film/novelisation).

Why not? If a Jedi really wants to get laid that badly, or if he just happens to meet someone for a one night stand or casual fling, there doesn't seem to be any Jedi rules against that, and seeing as how Lucas' quote about Jedi being celbiate does not exclude anything seen in the movies, then there is no reason to dismiss this.

That is an odd doctrine for a monastic order, as well as a disingenious interpretation of "desire". But technically possible, I suppose. Still, one wonders what this does for their attitude to women, if this is so. (Not that it is, as far as the EU is concerned.)

Heh, I actually wrote a chapter in UPF about this years ago, with Yoda visiting a young Twi'lek girl but that isn't what's relevant here.

United Federation of Planets?

The point is not moot because the very things that happened to Anakin Skywalker happened because he FORMED AN ATTACHMENT, GOT JEALOUS, AND WENT TO THE DARK SIDE! The exact thing he had been warned about by Obi Wan and Yoda! Apparently there was a bit of truth to what those old Jedi Masters were saying and Anakin ignored them. The Dark Side of the Force is a very real thing for Jedi to have to deal with, and Anakin was the worst possible Jedi to have formed an attachment because of his extreme devotion and loyalty to people he cared about.

Who did he become jealous of? And as noted, the vast majority of Jedi who fall do not do so for reasons of love; the only example I can think of off the top of my head apart from Anakin would be Shaela Nuur in Shadows and Light, what I would think qualifies as an "obscure source", and her "fall" was as much a momentary slip as a life-changing moment. Arguably, you could make the case that Githany also did, but even if you do not buy that she had already slipped by then the major factor was not her relationship with Kiel Charny, but that the Jedi terminated it. In Anakin's own case, the catalysing factor leading to his fall was precisely that the Order isolated him from his mother. The policies do not appear to work all that well, and in any case, is preventing a tiny fraction of falls occurring reason enough to limit the Knights in this fundamental way.

Last bit of your sentence got cut off there methinks , i'll let you finish it if you like before responding.

Argh, copy must have eaten my reply there. It was supposed to be, "And yes, attachment to property is not the same thing, but it points to a Jedi mentality of deprivation reminiscent of several real-life religions. That they cannot even wear their own clothing (Anakin doing so was considered radical and distasteful) is a telling example; even Knights Templar were allowed a few possessions (in their case, horses).

Elfdart wrote:I think it's a corner Lucas painted himself into with ROTJ. Luke and Leia can use the Force because it runs in the family as Luke said in ROTJ. Yoda says that he and Luke are the last Jedi, and it's already been established that the Empire killed the others off. If Jedi can have families, then that's not possible since there would be so many that the Empire would have a hard time so much as making a dent in their numbers, let alone reducing them to two or three.

The celibacy and the Force as a genetic trait are necessary for the story to make sense.

The Empire managed to do the same with the Antarian Rangers and many others who supported the Jedi in various ways to a good extent, and in cases the Antarian Rangers and Jedi interbred and married together.

Darth Fanboy wrote:I have a problem in this case in equating the Jedi with modern day fundamentalists, as the Dark Side of the Force is actually a very tangible thing and corruption is not something easily walked away from.

didn't they admit that there is no dark side in one of the New Jedi Order novels and it's the person wielding the force who makes things "dark" or "light"

Sarevok wrote: Maybe the Jedi do exactly that. In times of conflict like in the Kotor era Jedi can marry iirc. They can replenish their losses that way. But after some point they stop to prevent exceeding an upper limit.

I believe the rules against marriage were implemented after the Ruusan Reformation, same with the training Jedi from birth.

Saxtonite wrote: didn't they admit that there is no dark side in one of the New Jedi Order novels and it's the person wielding the force who makes things "dark" or "light"

Even if you believe that (And IIRC it was all an opinion, Jacen tried to walk that fine line later on and become Sith Lord-Lite) it still doesn't change the fact that the Force is tangible, and people who use it for evil, whether its a Dark Side or if its just user intent, are much more susceptible to corruption in real life. There's a big different between the JEdi Order, dealing with the Force, and modern day fundamentalists who are preaching out of books with nothing to back up their teachings except "faith."

Darth Hoth:

While I find myself on your side in these morality debates, I have the need for a correction/clarification from you.

You speak of Anakin referring to "desire" being forbidden. If you think it is stated where I think you think it is stated then you are mistaken.

Here is the AotC Screenplay:

ANAKIN: Attachment is forbidden. Possession is forbidden.
Compassion, which I would define as unconditional love, is
central to a Jedi's life, so you might say we're encouraged
to love.

Attachment and POSSESSION are referred to here. Not desire. Perhaps you know of a different source that declares this, but this passage from AotC is not it.

Saxtonite wrote:The Empire managed to do the same with the Antarian Rangers and many others who supported the Jedi in various ways to a good extent, and in cases the Antarian Rangers and Jedi interbred and married together.

I don't remember that from any of the movies.

It's amazing, as Orwell wrote many years ago, how people can't see what's right in front of their faces. The Jedi from the MOVIES aren't socially stunted, cloistered hermits with no emotions. They are simply an order that emphasizes NOT letting your emotions get the better of you, and placing justice, peace and order ahead of personal desires. Obi-Wan tells Luke to "bury" his feelings for his family and friends since they could be used against him -NOT "behave like a Vulcan".

Jedi Knights with families are not just a menace to the story (only two are left in ROTJ), but their families would be a distraction as well (at best) or a source of conflict in loyalty (at worst). This is one of the reasons monks and priests in real life aren't allowed to marry. A bishop doesn't have much of a problem sending a priest from one place to another since there's no wife and kids to pack up and move. In Star Wars it's easier for the government to send Jedi away for months or years to handle one problem or another because they don't have to worry about being away from families that don't exist.

Elfdart wrote: I don't remember that from any of the movies.

Because it was only referred to in the Wraith Squadron books of the EU. One of the pilots in that group had a very modest force ability. She ends up developing it a little more many years later and her child became a member of the New Jedi Order later on.

As for the rest of your post, that's pretty well dead on.

Elfdart wrote:I don't remember that from any of the movies.

the Wraith Squadron books in the EU, as well as The New Essential Chronology and other sources mention that.

Darth Fanboy wrote: Because it was only referred to in the Wraith Squadron books of the EU.

The New Essential Chronology and I believe some other EU sources mention that as well actually.

Darth Fanboy wrote:Even if you believe that (And IIRC it was all an opinion, Jacen tried to walk that fine line later on and become Sith Lord-Lite) it still doesn't change the fact that the Force is tangible, and people who use it for evil, whether its a Dark Side or if its just user intent, are much more susceptible to corruption in real life. There's a big different between the JEdi Order, dealing with the Force, and modern day fundamentalists who are preaching out of books with nothing to back up their teachings except "faith."

Oh. Okay.

Saxtonite wrote: The New Essential Chronology and I believe some other EU sources mention that as well actually.

My poor choice of words, I should have said that it was derived from the Wraith books, unless the ideas for Tyria Sarkin's background came from elsewhere.