PDA

View Full Version : Vader: Did he know Luke was his son? (ESB)



JEDIpartner
10-04-2004, 09:38 AM
This has been thrown back and forth for the last couple weeks since the DVD came out. The new exchange with the Emperor has how it is possible that the one who destroyed the Death Star could be the son of Anakin Skywlker. Earlier inthe film Vader says "...Skywalker is with them!" and proceeds to the Hoth system.

Some people have been arguing about the continuity error there. We had a brief chat about this over the weekend. We basically distilled it down to this: Vader knew that the young rebel's name was Luke Skywalker but didn't realise this Skywalker was his son.

I can't imagine that, in such a large galaxy, the only Skywalkers would have been Shmi, Anakin and Luke.

Thoughts?

Rocketboy
10-04-2004, 11:35 AM
Vader wouldn't be obsessed with finding a kid named Skywalker from Tatooine (assuming that he finds out what happened on Tatooine/moisture farm) who was strong with the force and came to the Death Star with Obi-Wan and later blew up the Death Star if he didn't think there was a connection.

Vader knew that Luke was his son. If not, his brain must've fallen out when he got that massive scar on his noggin.

JEDIpartner
10-04-2004, 12:55 PM
Possible he just wanted to get even and get confirmation on relationship?

Beast
10-04-2004, 01:26 PM
To me it's always been clear that Vader found out about Luke Skywalker, and kept it under his helmet from the Emperor. Which explains why the opening crawl says he's obsessed, and he even says Luke's name before he ever talks to the Emperor. The new dialogue is more or less to hammer home the point that Vader's plotting against the Emperor, which we see more clearly on Bespin. I didn't think before that people missed that whole plot point, but when JT even said that he didn't think that was the case I figured the new dialogue is for the best. As for Bespin we see for sure that Vader is tempting Luke about destroying the Emperor and ruling the Galaxy as Father and Son. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
10-04-2004, 01:43 PM
I always thought that it was crystal clear that Vader began having designs on Luke at the expense of the Emperor. But because of the lack of any other evidence, the original OT pretty much lays out the case that Vader wasn't even aware of any children and only began to realize the potential situation after he finds out about Luke (via spies? after ANH). Like I said, there wasn't much to go on, but a reasonable person could have figured out that Vader and the Emperor were going along on their merry way until some punk kid appeared and put a wrench in the whole plan. Offscreen, it's reasonable to assume that Vader put out an order to find out who did it. Then sometime before ESB, Vader finds out that it's some kid named "Skywalker" and the lightbulb goes off in his head. He clearly sets out on a vendetta of his own as evidenced by the dialogue early on in ESB. Palpatine isn't aware of his plans because it is only after Vader's attack on Hoth that the Emperor fizzes in and announces what Vader already knows, that somebody named Skywalker is afoot. So based on just the original cut alone, Vader's plans are exceedingly obvious to anyone paying attention. The new cut theoretically doesn't change that, but does introduce a potential problem when Vader asks, "How is that possible?" True, he is probably just misleading Palpatine, but the problem comes in for that casual audience member who was too asleep to get the point with the original cut. A line like the new one on the surface suggests that Vader doesn't know about this, which obviously flies in the face of the entire first battle sequence of the movie. So again, Lucas tampers with story first unnecessarily and then in such a way that it potentially makes the situation worse than it was to begin with. Would somebody please stop him? Please.

rbaumhauer
10-04-2004, 02:13 PM
My problem with how this is being portrayed is that, regardless of whether Vader knew Luke was his son or not, in the exchange in ESB (either original, or new version), Vader and Emperor discuss "turning" Luke. Given that the PT posits that there can only be two Sith - a Master and and Apprentice - why would those two figures discuss, between themselves, "turning" a new, third person to the Dark Side?

Given that the "there can be only two" bit seems to be almost a law of some sort, why would the Emperor agree with Vader's suggestion to "turn" Luke, especially given the relationship between them? Perhaps Vader is plotting against the Emperor, even at this stage, but if so, the whole conversation seems odd. Palpatine has just given Vader information (that he already had, but did Palpatine know this?) that poses a real problem (will Vader kill his son, or betray me?) - why wouldn't he have acted independently of Vader, for his own safety?

And why would Vader, knowing that Palpatine knows about Luke, suggest "turning" him, when the only logical outcome of that is either Vader or Palpatine is struck down to "make room" for the new Apprentice. Why not just say,"Son of Anakin Skywalker or not, I will destroy him, my Master"? Suggesting that he be "turned" has very big implications.

My take is that the "there can be only two" silliness from the PT didn't exist when the OT was made, and this is one detail that simply can't be altered to fit. The fact that the new dialog on the DVD just makes things more confusing and unclear is hardly surprising, since it seems like George is trying to ret-con one detail (Anakin's name, etc) while ignoring the larger problem of the conversation.

Rick

stillakid
10-04-2004, 02:47 PM
My problem with how this is being portrayed is that, regardless of whether Vader knew Luke was his son or not, in the exchange in ESB (either original, or new version), Vader and Emperor discuss "turning" Luke. Given that the PT posits that there can only be two Sith - a Master and and Apprentice - why would those two figures discuss, between themselves, "turning" a new, third person to the Dark Side?

Given that the "there can be only two" bit seems to be almost a law of some sort, why would the Emperor agree with Vader's suggestion to "turn" Luke, especially given the relationship between them? Perhaps Vader is plotting against the Emperor, even at this stage, but if so, the whole conversation seems odd. Palpatine has just given Vader information (that he already had, but did Palpatine know this?) that poses a real problem (will Vader kill his son, or betray me?) - why wouldn't he have acted independently of Vader, for his own safety?

And why would Vader, knowing that Palpatine knows about Luke, suggest "turning" him, when the only logical outcome of that is either Vader or Palpatine is struck down to "make room" for the new Apprentice. Why not just say,"Son of Anakin Skywalker or not, I will destroy him, my Master"? Suggesting that he be "turned" has very big implications.

My take is that the "there can be only two" silliness from the PT didn't exist when the OT was made, and this is one detail that simply can't be altered to fit. The fact that the new dialog on the DVD just makes things more confusing and unclear is hardly surprising, since it seems like George is trying to ret-con one detail (Anakin's name, etc) while ignoring the larger problem of the conversation.

Rick


Excellent point and backed up by Palpatine's words later on in ROTJ when he asks Vader if his "feelings on this are clear?" It should have been obvious to the audience at that point (if they hadn't gotten it already) that Palpatine had reason to worry about Vader's intentions. Of course, in 1983, we didn't have this idea of "there can be only two Sith," but it was still implied that Palpatine seemed fearful that Vader might attempt a coup if he had his son on his side. However, that doesn't negate the idea that the 3 of them could have ruled together given that fact that Palpatine doesn't discourage Vader's attempts to turn Luke. So in a 1983 kind of world, it all makes sense. But it seems that the introduction of "there can only be two Sith" is the basis for any problems.

Mr. JabbaJohnL
10-04-2004, 06:15 PM
In the next cut of ESB:
"Skywalker? Oooohhhhh . . . so that's why Padmé was so fat 25 years ago! I thought it was all that damn space-chocolate!" :D

Anyway, yeah, I think Vader was hiding stuff from Palpatine. Seems like they both figured out that Luke was Anakin's son, but Vader didn't want to tell Palpatine, so he could recruit to the Dark Side and kill the Emperor. Palpatine, maybe he told Vader how he knew about Luke cause he just dindn't care about the two-Sith thing, or planned on bumping off Vader once Luke was in the picture.

Rocketboy
10-04-2004, 06:47 PM
My problem with how this is being portrayed is that, regardless of whether Vader knew Luke was his son or not, in the exchange in ESB (either original, or new version), Vader and Emperor discuss "turning" Luke. Given that the PT posits that there can only be two Sith - a Master and and Apprentice - why would those two figures discuss, between themselves, "turning" a new, third person to the Dark Side?They want to turn Luke to the dark side. There is never any mention of turning him into a Sith.
There are drak Jedi and there are Sith.

stillakid
10-04-2004, 06:51 PM
My take is that the "there can be only two" silliness from the PT didn't exist when the OT was made, and this is one detail that simply can't be altered to fit. The fact that the new dialog on the DVD just makes things more confusing and unclear is hardly surprising, since it seems like George is trying to ret-con one detail (Anakin's name, etc) while ignoring the larger problem of the conversation.

Rick

I agree, but just derived an alternate explanation for the situation:

http://forums.sirstevesguide.com/showpost.php?p=353121&postcount=44


That's another interesting and valid point. I've touched on this previously as well and went so far as to suggest that Palpatine, in fact, is NOT a Force user himself...at least not until well into the Original Trilogy.

The fact of the matter is that he just flat out doesn't need to use the Force or any kind of "dark manipulation" to get his plan into motion. Based purely on the events in the Prequels, he is using more down to earth (down to Coruscant ) methods of politics to achieve everything. (Aside from the other fact that all of his plans do work but only out of shear dumb luck, but that's another discussion).

But anyway, the reason this is relevant to your statement above is because you're right...if Palpy wanted a powerful Force user at his side then it would have been in his best interest to knock up some other Force User (female) and take the child away until it was old enough to be useful (ala, Maul). But he doesn't...so why not we might ask?

Well first off, if he was really a Force user throughout TPM and AOTC, the Jedi surely would have "felt" his presence anytime they stood near him. There is evidence of this occurring during ANH when Old Ben is hiding out inside the Falcon and Vader senses his old master. That is just one example amongst many. So right there, it is clear that Palpatine is not a Force user himself.

With that idea in mind, that a Force user would give himself away so easily, Palpatine would not want to use it himself nor necessarily be around anyone who does for very long. Yeah, he uses Maul, but Obi Wan's statement at the beginning of TPM seems to suggest that he senses Maul (I sense something elusive). No, we don't know for sure what he's referring to, but given the evidence, he can't be sensing Palpatine. And according to TPM, there are only two bad guys at a time, so Maul is the only other choice.

So while Palpatine is free to run around the government buildings secure in the knowledge that nobody can sense him (because he isn't a Force user), he sends Maul out as the muscle. But then he dies unexpectedly.

Which begs the next question: Where did Dooku come from? Was he also "evil" during the time of TPM? If so, then how does that jive with the "there can only be two" thing? So Palps remains "clean" (of the Force stuff himself), he picks up another bad guy to go out and do the dirty work. But Dooku is old and the suggestion is that Anakin is his offspring. So Dooku would have had to shag Shmi up about 10 years prior to TPM. The order for the clones (presumably from Dooku?) would have come in when Ani was about 10 or 11, which means that Dooku was a bad guy some 20 years before AOTC. But Maul is also a bad guy during that time. The ONLY logical conclusion is that during the Prequels Palpatine is NEVER a Sith! During TPM, the "two" are Dooku and Maul. During AOTC, there is only one: Dooku. Palpatine is eyeing Skywalker to fill that gap. Once he does in AOTC, Palps is free to have Anakin kill Dooku so that he (Palpatine) can begin his own training as a Force user. So during the OT films, the "two" are Palps and Vader...the unexpected then happens when from out of nowhere, it turns out that a young rash horny Anakin produced some offspring which were cleverly hidden by Obi Wan. This immediately gets Palpatine nervous as he figured that he had manipulated the situation perfectly to keep himself in power (with just enough Force ability to do it) and Vader under his thumb (because he stroked his young ego). But now there is another potential Force User out there who will have a natural "allegiance" to Darth Vader. The Emperor has every reason to be scared and begins a campaign of power reinforcement by saying things to Vader like, "I have foreseen it." All complete B**lsh** of course on his part, but because Vader is caught under the spell, he believes it. But he's not so much a puppet because Vader himself envisions a future wherein Luke is at his side and the two of them stage a coup.

The problem though is in turning Luke to the darkside. Can he do it? The Emperor knows that if Vader is successful, he (Palps) is doomed. But the unexpected happens again! Luke takes Vader down. The Emperor couldn't be more elated. Now that troublesome Anakin can be disposed of...except that Luke still refuses to turn. What a stubborn dolt he is! "Okay, fine," the Emperor says to himself. "I'll kill the kid off and keep Vader around a while longer." But Palpatine only had limited Force ability at this point and couldn't control it. So when the change happens in Anakin and he sees the light, Palpatine doesn't have the power to save himself while Vader does him in. Palps never had to use the Force to get what he wanted because subtle politics and ego stroking always worked for him before. The one time he does invoke the Force, it is his undoing.


Now, to be realistic, I don't think that Lucas really had this kind of scenario in mind. This is something that I've pulled directly from the films themselves. Except for a minor gap in the "two" rule (when Dooku is the only one), the rest seems to ENTIRELY explain away any inconsistencies regarding who knew what and when and why things end up the way they do. And it all rests on the idea that Palpatine is NOT a Force user until after Vader is born. To date, there is NO evidence to suggest that this idea is outright wrong, but admittedly, it takes a bit of conjecture and reasoning skills to make it happen.

Thoughts? Discuss...

JediTricks
10-04-2004, 10:23 PM
To me it's always been clear that Vader found out about Luke Skywalker, and kept it under his helmet from the Emperor. Which explains why the opening crawl says he's obsessed, and he even says Luke's name before he ever talks to the Emperor. The new dialogue is more or less to hammer home the point that Vader's plotting against the Emperor, which we see more clearly on Bespin. I didn't think before that people missed that whole plot point, but when JT even said that he didn't think that was the case I figured the new dialogue is for the best. Whoa whoa whoa. First you ASSUME that the original dialogue here definitely meant that - perhaps it may have, but it just as easily could have meant something else - and then you use my difference of opinion to support this change which really doesn't make anything more clear as this very thread proves. I don't think this new dialogue works, I think MAYBE it can support your theory but again it's a MAYBE situation.

Originally, Vader took an Imperial armada out to search for Skywalker and the Rebels, then when Luke started training with Yoda and made big waves in the Force, the Emp called up Vader and said that the Force was greatly disturbed and Luke was their new enemy, Vader's treachery to the Emperor comes in this scene not from trying to hide Luke, which he clearly was unable to do, but from trying to save the boy's life for what we later find out may have entirely been a personal reason. The Emp isn't shocked or surprised here by there being a "son of Skywalker", he's almost blase' about it, he only is showing concern that the boy has now become a dangerous threat to the Sith lords.

For your theory to have been valid originally, Vader would have had to have hidden his knowledge of Luke AND his intentions from Palpatine - his Sith master - for years. Maybe he did, but it doesn't seem very likely given what Vader says about his master in ROTJ, so I don't see how you can simply assume that everybody else is wrong and your assumption is right - I don't buy that, not on the slim wiggle room the original dialogue had, and not on this confusing mess of a new version.




My take is that the "there can be only two" silliness from the PT didn't exist when the OT was made, and this is one detail that simply can't be altered to fit. The fact that the new dialog on the DVD just makes things more confusing and unclear is hardly surprising, since it seems like George is trying to ret-con one detail (Anakin's name, etc) while ignoring the larger problem of the conversation.It is possible that the "there can be only 2" thing was suggested in ROTJ, when the Emperor tells Luke that the boy will take his father's place at Palpatine's side. Of course, the Emp tells Luke this only after he's defeated Vader, but it could be that this was Palpy's plan all along. I don't particularly care for it, but perhaps being a Sith Lord is more involved than just being a Dark Jedi, and it is through this that the Emp and Vader plan to bring Luke into the fold.

stillakid
10-04-2004, 11:31 PM
It is possible that the "there can be only 2" thing was suggested in ROTJ, when the Emperor tells Luke that the boy will take his father's place at Palpatine's side. Of course, the Emp tells Luke this only after he's defeated Vader, but it could be that this was Palpy's plan all along. I don't particularly care for it, but perhaps being a Sith Lord is more involved than just being a Dark Jedi, and it is through this that the Emp and Vader plan to bring Luke into the fold.

If memory serves correctly, Palpatine doesn't say "take your father's place at my side" until Luke has pops wheezing on the ground. At this point, it sure looks like Vader's done for. Plus, Palps figures just one more good swing of the bat will solidify Luke's "turn." Palps of course makes the assumption that Luke will just "join him" once he finishes off daddy, but from what we know about Luke, that doesn't appear to be likely anyway. So I agree with everything you've got. Except I don't know about this "dark Jedi" crappola. Sounds suspiciously like EU to me and shouldn't come into play regarding onscreen stuff. Either there are "two" or not. No middle ground halfsies. So again, I think that the only way to rectify the apparent "error" in this "two Sith" concept is to assume that Palpatine A) wasn't a Sith until at least Episode IV, and B) that he figured that he'd have to kill off either Vader or Luke in the end. He didn't appear to care much either way, but he knew that having both of them alive meant his time would be up sooner than later. So being the master manipulator (sans Force/magic/fairy dust) that he is, he pitted father and son against one another and got a free show.

rbaumhauer
10-05-2004, 02:23 AM
Interesting take on the "only two" idea - I guess we'll have to wait and see, as the rumors about Ep3 seem to suggest that Palpatine may be using the Force in the PT timeframe..........

Of course, I always preferred that the Emperor was never a Force user - the Emperor of the ANH novelization was much more interesting to me than what we ended up with in ROTJ.

El Chuxter
10-05-2004, 11:33 AM
We only have Yoda to believe on the "only two" rule, and he (like the other Jedi) thought the Sith were extinct, so where's he getting it from? (Big ol' plot hole in TPM there, folks.) Who's to say he wasn't mistaken, or maybe that Palpatine considered the time right to dispense of that rule?

Or my current (soon to be disproven :p) theory: Darth Maul was never truly a Sith! He was a very powerful assassin, skilled in the Dark Side, who had been led by Palpatine to believe he was a Sith, but was thoroughly disposable. Seriously, think about it: did the guy who masterminded taking over the galaxy really expect a bulldog to have enough imagination to follow in his footsteps?

JediDave
10-05-2004, 01:09 PM
From my perspective, the only thing that makes sense is to assume that there are Dark users of the Force who are *not* members (lords) of the Sith. First of all, it does not even make sense to basically say that there can only be two Dark users of the Force in existence at any given time. But the movies themselves support this, albeit in a roundabout way. In AOTC, the Jedi eventually discover that Dooku is in fact now their enemy, yet they do not refer to him as a Sith lord. Having speculated about the reappearance of the Sith in TPM, neither Yoda nor Mace Windu nor any other Jedi comes to the conclusion in AOTC that Dooku was the mysterious Dark Lord who had been working behind the scenes (which would have been one logical conclusion) or that Dooku is in fact an "apprentice" to another Dark Lord. To Yoda, et. al., Dooku is simply a Jedi gone bad.

Leap forward to the OT, and this helps explain the Vader/Emperor/Luke question. According to Lucas himself (or his current explanation), Vader and Emperor Palpatine are each plotting to do away with the other, and they may well realize this is the other's intention, but at the same time it is possible to "convert" Luke and make him an "ally" without turning him into a Sith lord. It may be that Vader is more the "plotter" than Palpatine, since his obsession with Luke is the backbone of TESB and Palpatine evidently does not pick up on Luke's identity until midway through TESB.

Whatever else you might say about him, Lucas is not so unfamiliar with his own story that he would "forget" that Vader mentions Skywalker early on in TESB or that the opening crawl specifically refers to his obsession with finding Luke, so we can assume that it is not a continuity error. The only logical reason for Vader to be so obsessed with Luke is that he has discovered Luke's identity and has set out on a personal quest to recruit his son. Vader knows that eventually Palpatine will learn of Luke, and Vader knows that when he does, the Emperor will go after Luke (Obi-Wan clearly tells Luke that the Emperor knew that if Anakin had any offspring, they would be a threat to him). So Vader takes preemptive action, intending to take Luke as his own apprentice and supplant the Emperor before the Emperor knows what's happening.

When the Emperor does learn of Luke's identity, Vader's response is to feign ignorance and surprise, which only makes sense. I think it is this that Lucas tried to reinforce with the "revised" scene in the DVD version ("How can that be possible?" is not an honest question but a feigned expression of shock). Unfortunately, the deceptive nature of this scene was never even that clear in the original version, and it (obviously) is no clearer in the new version, precisely because many people are taking it literally and thinking that Vader really doesn't know Luke's identity.

Remember, though, that Lucas has repeatedly said the Sith are all about deception and double-dealing, etc., even amongst themselves, and that must inform the interpretation of the Vader/Emperor relationship.

Mr. JabbaJohnL
10-05-2004, 06:47 PM
We only have Yoda to believe on the "only two" rule, and he (like the other Jedi) thought the Sith were extinct, so where's he getting it from? (Big ol' plot hole in TPM there, folks.) Who's to say he wasn't mistaken, or maybe that Palpatine considered the time right to dispense of that rule?

Or my current (soon to be disproven :p) theory: Darth Maul was never truly a Sith! He was a very powerful assassin, skilled in the Dark Side, who had been led by Palpatine to believe he was a Sith, but was thoroughly disposable. Seriously, think about it: did the guy who masterminded taking over the galaxy really expect a bulldog to have enough imagination to follow in his footsteps?
I think Mace made it pretty clear in the funeral scene about Darth Maul being a Sith.

2-1B
10-06-2004, 03:34 AM
I have to partly disagree with stillakid and Rick (as usual :D ):

At no time do ANY of the Sith talk about the "rule of 2" onscreen. And at that, it's never even really stated as a "rule" . . .

All we see is Yoda's speech about them (as Chux said) and in his wisdom he realizes the futility in that anybody who uses the dark side for power is obviously only going to go along with a master for so long.

Personally, I take all the EU backstory and "rule of 2" crap and throw it right out the window. It's ridiculous. All that talk about setting up a rule of 2 to make sure the Sith survive. Give me a ****ing break already. :crazed: What true diabolical powermonger like Palpatine is gonna give a wampa's arse about who runs the show after he is gone ?

He obviously doesn't care about Vader taking over for him - he wants an apprentice to do his bidding and be his enforcer.

"Rule of 2" . . . come on, it's ridiculous. Yes, I most certainly do fault GLu for putting this into TPM and letting these EU hacks run rampant with the idea.

Yet, by itself in TPM, I don't mind the idea of "two there are, no more" because it is a logical way of seeing how such a power structure can only last for so long. :Ogre:

JediTricks
10-06-2004, 05:47 AM
Except I don't know about this "dark Jedi" crappola. Sounds suspiciously like EU to me and shouldn't come into play regarding onscreen stuff.Oh, the "dark Jedi" thing is EU but your "Palpatine wasn't a Force-user" theory that requires serious imagination and acceptance and has NO evidentiary basis is not? Consider that Yoda talks about Luke going to the Dark Side of the Force, never does he mention "Sith" in any context, so you tell me how "Dark Jedi" has no canon support.


We only have Yoda to believe on the "only two" rule, and he (like the other Jedi) thought the Sith were extinct, so where's he getting it from? (Big ol' plot hole in TPM there, folks.) Who's to say he wasn't mistaken, or maybe that Palpatine considered the time right to dispense of that rule? NICE! Good angle. Although I basically accept the EU explanation from the TPM era about the Sith creating that rule because they were all bloodthirsty killers who would wipe out the entire Sith lifestyle rather than see another Sith Lord succeed with it over themselves, your points do fit here just as well. (And who am I to say that onscreen evidence from an unsupported party is infallible? I'm the guy who believes that everything Qui-Gon was saying about midichlorians and the Living Force and the Prophecy of the Son of Suns is meant as his own misguided malarky.) I might suggest though that Yoda is very old and possibly heard the rule comment in his younger days from an older Jedi who had experienced the Sith first-hand.

Like JediDave, my personal theory has always been that the Sith are not synonymous with Dark-leaning Force-users, that the Sith are a specific cult made up of those who have accepted the Dark path as their connection to the Force. It'd be analogous to Catholics, who believe in Christianity, but are not simply "Christians".


Or my current (soon to be disproven :p) theory: Darth Maul was never truly a Sith! He was a very powerful assassin, skilled in the Dark Side, who had been led by Palpatine to believe he was a Sith, but was thoroughly disposable. Seriously, think about it: did the guy who masterminded taking over the galaxy really expect a bulldog to have enough imagination to follow in his footsteps? Sorry Chux, perhaps Palpy is yanking Maul's chain, but that seems too convoluted to me. Palps trusts Maul to win that battle for him, he talks openly about their Sithly deeds and plots, and we are told in the film that he is a Sith Lord.

stillakid
10-06-2004, 11:57 AM
Oh, the "dark Jedi" thing is EU but your "Palpatine wasn't a Force-user" theory that requires serious imagination and acceptance and has NO evidentiary basis is not? Consider that Yoda talks about Luke going to the Dark Side of the Force, never does he mention "Sith" in any context, so you tell me how "Dark Jedi" has no canon support..

Um, I do distinctly recall mentioning that my idea was not only just my idea, but also that it most likely isn't what Lucas had in mind. Beyond that, I've never heard the term "Dark Jedi" in any onscreen moments. The implication supported by TPM dialogue (that Caesar points out above) is that there are good guys (Jedi Knights) and bad guys (Sith...and just two of them, a master and an apprentice). That's what we hear. That's what we have to understand as the intention. None of this "gray area" Dark Jedi stuff.

Given that basis, we need to then look at the apparent contradiction that is set up if Palpatine, Maul, and Dooku are all "bad guys" at the same time. Then the next complication when the Emperor and Vader plot to "turn" Luke to the darkside. Those are the issues that are at hand.

So on that note, something's got to give. Either we invoke EU material (ie, Dark Jedi) as a kind of "not really a Jedi or a Sith either," or we take what is mentioned onscreen and interpret it in a way that provides room for it all to coexist. That's what I have done by suggesting the Palpatine is not a Force user throughout most of the saga.

In addition to the evidence I've provided thus far, a new telling piece popped into my head just this morning. In ANH, Tarkin admonishes Vader when he says, "You my friend are the last of their religion..." Now, of course Tarkin was wrong, as he believed all the Jedi to be dead from the Clone Wars (he didn't know about Obi or Yoda escaping). But Tarkin does know Palpatine and undoubtedly he knows him fairly well due to his position as the guy in charge of the Empire's new secret weapon. Admittedly this is conjecture on my part, but I find it extremely plausible to suggest that someone in Tarkin's position would be aware of whether Palpatine was a Force user or not in the same vein as Vader. For Tarkin to suggest that Vader was the last of the religion while at the same time knowing that Palpatine was also a "Jedi" (or derivative) seems quite odd, doesn't it? And this is in addition to the fact that we just frankly don't see Palpatine ever using the Force to do anything until well into ROTJ. He talks a good game (of sensing this or that) but again, those could be lies told to Vader to perpetuate his "aura" of power.

Someone else also mentioned Mace Windu's idea in AOTC that their powers must have been blocked because of a Sith was in control of the Senate. But that was Mace's conjecture based on the rumor that a Sith was in control and they hadn't sensed him. Mace was assuming that the bad guy who took control of the Senate was a Force user, and since they couldn't sense him, he must be using the darkside to block and diminish their own use of the Force. The situation could just as easily (and more likely) be that the bad guy in charge of the Senate (Palpatine) isn't using the Force at all, so therefore there is nothing to sense. As stated, Palpatine thus far hasn't had to use anything but clever politics and ego stroking to get his way. And that in and of itself is a powerful message regarding politics and a weak electorate that I would have assumed would be a stellar message that a guy like Lucas would want to portray. I mean, isn't it a stronger story to show how far a slimeball can get by using subtle means of manipulation instead of having him rely on magic and parlour tricks to do it? Am I wrong to "interpret" the supernatural out of the story whenever possible so that "real world" motivations and actions provide a better and more relevant explanation?

JediDave
10-06-2004, 02:53 PM
Beyond that, I've never heard the term "Dark Jedi" in any onscreen moments. The implication supported by TPM dialogue (that Caesar points out above) is that there are good guys (Jedi Knights) and bad guys (Sith...and just two of them, a master and an apprentice). That's what we hear. That's what we have to understand as the intention. None of this "gray area" Dark Jedi stuff.

The implication is not that *all* "bad guys" (I'm assuming you mean bad guys who use the Force) are Sith. That is a sweeping generalization not supported in the films. As I posted earlier, the Jedi in AOTC never refer to Dooku as a member of the Sith, even though they discover he has turned to the Dark side. Throughout the OT, neither Ben nor Yoda warns Luke about "becoming a Sith," which would be proper terminology if "turning to the Dark side" equaled "becoming a Sith." They simply warn him of the dangers of being tempted by the Dark side. Furthermore, it is not logical to assume or make the claim that with all the billions of beings in the universe, only two users of the Force can "go bad" at one time.

Additionally, you must remember that there are obviously many beings with a strong sense of the Force (and even users of the Force) who are not Jedi. Therefore, calling a Dark user of the Force a "Dark Jedi" is a misnomer as well. The Jedi are a specific, elite group who are trained to use the Force for the good of the universe. Similarly, the Sith are a cult (of two) who are sworn enemies of the Jedi and who seek to conquer the known universe with the power of the Dark side. To say there is no room for non-Jedi or non-Sith Force users is simply not logical and is also not supported anywhere in the films. On the contrary, the subtext of the films suggests precisely what I've observed--that many people have the ability to use the Force for good or ill, and many in fact do learn to use it, but not all are Jedi, nor are all "evil" people Sith.

On another note, this conjecture about Palpatine not being a user of the Force will be negated with Episode III. But, as I said, there is no real contradiction or conflict of logic in the films if you understand it as I have explained it. Sith are not Dark Jedi (though obviously they can be former Jedi), and Palpatine never was a Jedi or a "derivative." Users of the Force are *not* automatically Jedi or Sith, which are both, for all intents and purposes, organizations. The idea of the Sith has been around since the beginning (ANH), but at no time was Luke warned about "turning to the Sith." After all, one of the most prominent themes of Star Wars (as GL has stated, but it's pretty obvious in the films) is that we all have the potential for good *or* evil, and that theme would be somewhat undermined if no more than two Force users could go bad at a time.

stillakid
10-07-2004, 02:46 AM
The implication is not that *all* "bad guys" (I'm assuming you mean bad guys who use the Force) are Sith. That is a sweeping generalization not supported in the films. As I posted earlier, the Jedi in AOTC never refer to Dooku as a member of the Sith, even though they discover he has turned to the Dark side. Throughout the OT, neither Ben nor Yoda warns Luke about "becoming a Sith," which would be proper terminology if "turning to the Dark side" equaled "becoming a Sith." They simply warn him of the dangers of being tempted by the Dark side. Furthermore, it is not logical to assume or make the claim that with all the billions of beings in the universe, only two users of the Force can "go bad" at one time.

Additionally, you must remember that there are obviously many beings with a strong sense of the Force (and even users of the Force) who are not Jedi. Therefore, calling a Dark user of the Force a "Dark Jedi" is a misnomer as well. The Jedi are a specific, elite group who are trained to use the Force for the good of the universe. Similarly, the Sith are a cult (of two) who are sworn enemies of the Jedi and who seek to conquer the known universe with the power of the Dark side. To say there is no room for non-Jedi or non-Sith Force users is simply not logical and is also not supported anywhere in the films. On the contrary, the subtext of the films suggests precisely what I've observed--that many people have the ability to use the Force for good or ill, and many in fact do learn to use it, but not all are Jedi, nor are all "evil" people Sith.

On another note, this conjecture about Palpatine not being a user of the Force will be negated with Episode III. But, as I said, there is no real contradiction or conflict of logic in the films if you understand it as I have explained it. Sith are not Dark Jedi (though obviously they can be former Jedi), and Palpatine never was a Jedi or a "derivative." Users of the Force are *not* automatically Jedi or Sith, which are both, for all intents and purposes, organizations. The idea of the Sith has been around since the beginning (ANH), but at no time was Luke warned about "turning to the Sith." After all, one of the most prominent themes of Star Wars (as GL has stated, but it's pretty obvious in the films) is that we all have the potential for good *or* evil, and that theme would be somewhat undermined if no more than two Force users could go bad at a time.

Dave, let me first say that I like your interpretation. But I also have to say that it is maybe as valid as my own interpretation. I think that it could go either way. Admittedly, I make the assumption that "bad guy" equals "Sith." On the other hand, your entire argument is based on something that Yoda doesn't say (that is to warn Luke about not becoming Sith). I don't agree that the mere absence of this reference automatically means that Luke would just be in this gray area of "bad guy" that you talk about. There is no evidence whatsoever in the saga to suggest this middle ground of "Force user but neither Sith nor Jedi" that you base your argument on.

Moreso, you also suggest that many people have the ability to use the Force for good or ill, and many in fact do learn to use it. I'd like to inquire who exactly you're referring to here. I personally don't recall seeing any "normal" characters seeing the future or using telekinesis.

rbaumhauer
10-17-2004, 10:55 AM
While I would like to believe the idea that there are Force users, good and evil, who are neither Jedi nor Sith, I don't think the movies support it. Maybe the ancillary stuff does (novelizations, etc), but like stilllakid says, if it's not in the movie, it might as well not exist.

It's the kind of idea that made sense in the "old" GFFA, which seemed like a big, open place right up until the end of ESB. Since then, it just keeps shrinking, and given the "rule of two" (which is never contradicted by anybody in the movies), I see no reason to believe that Lucas has any use for the concept of "gray" Force users. Star Wars is populated, almost entirely, with Black Hats and White Hats - even the neutrals (Han, Lando, etc) eventually take sides.

So, like I said, I personally like the idea of lots of other Force users running around in the background. That said, from the end of ESB on the implication is that there are really only two people who could save the GFFA (one being Luke), and the PT has essentially narrowed it down to the point that only the Skywalker clan matters. All those other potential Force users just don't fit with what we are explicitly told and shown in the movies - they make the GFFA feel too big for the story Lucas has chosen to tell.

Which gets to the heart of the matter, I guess - I've come to the conclusion that "Star Wars" set up a situation that Lucas was unable/unwilling to continue with. By creating a whole Galaxy controlled by an Evil Empire, he created the expectation (in me, at least) that the story would have a scope to match that scale. In the end, he told a story that would have fit better in a solar system with a few habitable planets, or perhaps a small cluster of 10-20 stars. In the end, there's an inherent imbalance between setting the Saga against a "galactic" background, with millions/billions of star systems, and then having everything come down to just two people in the end.

JediTricks
10-17-2004, 11:12 PM
While I would like to believe the idea that there are Force users, good and evil, who are neither Jedi nor Sith, I don't think the movies support it. Maybe the ancillary stuff does (novelizations, etc), but like stilllakid says, if it's not in the movie, it might as well not exist.Well, I think it might be in the movies, from a certain point of view. I'd say Anakin in Ep 1 is an example of a Force-user who isn't a Jedi and is neither specifically Light or Dark-oriented, I guess under the broadest term he'd be a "Grey Jedi" if Qui-Gon had never landed on Tatooine.

stillakid
10-17-2004, 11:27 PM
Well, I think it might be in the movies, from a certain point of view. I'd say Anakin in Ep 1 is an example of a Force-user who isn't a Jedi and is neither specifically Light or Dark-oriented, I guess under the broadest term he'd be a "Grey Jedi" if Qui-Gon had never landed on Tatooine.


I suppose so. But would the definition of a gray Jedi mean that the Force user is purposefully using the Force? Or would it be so broad a definition as to include those who hold the potential and manage to use it from time to time whether they know it or not? If that's the case, then yeah, I suppose all those freaky alien Pod pilots would then be in that gray category. But from the way "Star Wars" seems to put people (and aliens) into black and white categories, it still seems more appropriate to assume that George means for us to see that Good=Jedi and Bad=Sith with nothing inbetween.