PDA

View Full Version : Was Obi-Wan Lying to Luke about Anakin/Vader?



JediTricks
01-03-2005, 06:40 PM
In the classic trilogy, Obi-Wan Kenobi told young Luke Skywalker that the boy's father was a pupil of Kenobi's and was betrayed and murdered by another pupil named Darth Vader. Later in the trilogy, Jedi Master Yoda while teaching Luke the ways of the Force made references to that same point, yet as we later learn in that same film Darth Vader actually is Anakin Skywalker, Luke's father.

In the final film, Luke confronts Obi-Wan's spirit on this issue and Kenobi tells Luke in a now-infamous quote is that what he told him Vader destroying Anakin was true... "from a certain point of view".

This has been a long-debated issue among Star Wars fans, was Obi-Wan lying in A New Hope when he told Luke that Anakin was killed by Vader, or was old Ben not lying and simply being cryptic? Putting aside any justification issue about possibly protecting Luke from a horrible and devastating truth, vote now and share YOUR certain point of view!

Slicker
01-03-2005, 06:45 PM
I never thought that Ben was lying at all to Luke. I saw it as being the biggest lesson you could ever have in viewing things from both sides as Jedi are supposed to do. I don't think it was meant for Luke to figure out on his own but was more to teach him to think more about situations.

Beast
01-03-2005, 07:12 PM
Obi-Wan was indeed technically lieing to Luke at the time. Hence how uncomforatble he is when he's discussing what happened. But the lie is more from twisting the truth to protect Luke, than outright lieing to his face. Obi-Wan needed Luke who was considered the 'New Hope', and knew that there was no way that Luke Whinestalker was going to follow him had he told him the blunt truth at the time. Luke needed to grow up some, and prepare for the truth before it could safely be revealed to him. I rather doubt that Luke would have chosen to follow the same man who failed to properly train his father, which allowed him to be corrupted by the dark side. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

dr_evazan22
01-03-2005, 08:30 PM
I pretty much agree with JJB there, that Ben was technically lying, but that it was a necessary lie at the time. I think it is entirely possible for someone to have a life changing moment (it may happen VERY RARELY though). I do disagree with JJB about Obi failing to properly train Ani. I again think that that is Obi's own unique point of view, and shows the depth of how he cared for Ani, placing blame upon himself even though as Leia says to Luke in ANH "He has to choose his own path".

Kidhuman
01-03-2005, 08:32 PM
No he wasnt. If you omit things, its not lying, its misleading. There lies the difference.

stillakid
01-03-2005, 09:25 PM
Why this was ever a question boggles the mind. Old Ben wasn't "technically" lying or anything else underhanded. He told Luke the truth as he saw it: that the good man who was Anakin was killed by a bad man named Darth Vader. Now Ben did leave out that those two personalities happened to inhabit the same body, but as far as he (Ben) was concerned, it didn't matter. Anakin was dead and wasn't coming back. Proof of this? He adamently maintains this belief throughout the trilogy, even when he goes into greater detail with Luke in ROTJ. Even when Luke continued to believe that "there is still good in him," Ben resisted insisting that no, Anakin was dead forever.

So an emphatic no. Ben never lied to Luke and there is no proof nor reason to suspect that he did.

Beast
01-03-2005, 09:28 PM
No he wasnt. If you omit things, its not lying, its misleading. There lies the difference.
Omiting a fact and saying that Darth Vader betrayed and murdered Anakin Skywalker a pretty big differences. But then whether it's a lie or not is based upon our own "points of view." :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Kidhuman
01-03-2005, 09:31 PM
He told him the truth from that point of view, but like STilla said, he left out the fact that his Dad was a bi-polar mess.

stillakid
01-03-2005, 09:36 PM
He told him the truth from that point of view, but like STilla said, he left out the fact that his Dad was a bi-polar mess.

Heck, I was even ignoring the Expanded Universe episodes that George is calling the Prequel trilogy. :D But geesh, if we include what happened in there, then yeah, Ben lied through his teeth. Not only did he not find Anakin, decide to train him, and fail, but Anakin never was a good man. Squeeky clean kid, but never a good man.

It's best not to go there for the sake of the poll question. :D

Beast
01-03-2005, 10:15 PM
Obi-Wan never claims to find Anakin. He says "When I first knew him...". He also never once said he decided to train Anakin. He says "I took it upon myself...", as if it was some sort of quest or burden. So everything Obi-Wan says is pretty much double talk to avoid telling the full truth. And wether or not he's a good man is also open to interpretation. Every man has faults, but until he fell to the Dark Side he could have been considered a 'Good Man', at least by comparison. :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

03springfield
01-03-2005, 10:18 PM
Obi was indeed lying. Not to be jerk but to safeguard the galaxy from yet another hot-head Skywalker. In ANH Luke is all about joining "the Academy" whose graduating classes no doubt head straight for service in the Empire. Why? Because his dad was a pilot. If Luke was told at that time that Vader was his father, he would have made a beeline right to him. He either wouldn't believe his father was an evil overlord or couldn't grasp the concept as a farmboy in the middle of nowhere. Either way he would be knocking on daddy's door and in a much better position to turn to the darkside. Obi wan knew this to be true.

dindae
01-04-2005, 07:26 AM
I believe that he did lie but I believe that it is a lie he has forced himself to believe. Here is a guy who fails to train Anakin properly. Anakin not only grows up and falls to the dark side but supposedly hunts down and kills the rest of the jedi. At this point Obi-Wan has to feel responsible for all of his friends deaths and the destuction of the Jedi Order. Also I'm sure he can't help but feel like a fool for helping Palpatine come to power. Ultimately Obi-Wan could blame himself for everything bad in the original trilogy so maybe he lies to himself to not go completely insane with guilt.

OC47150
01-04-2005, 07:34 AM
Misleading to protect Luke, yes, but not lying.

Droid
01-04-2005, 07:41 AM
The original trilogy leads us to believe that Obi-wan did not do a good job training Anakin, but like so many things, I do not believe the prequels back that up. Anakin is the problem, not Obi-wan. Indeed, as I have said in another thread, Obi-wan warns Yoda and Windu in Episode II that Anakin should be on a tighter leash and it is YODA (who we were lead to believe in the original trilogy would have done a better job training Anakin than Obi-wan) that tells Obi-wan he is wrong about Anakin.

dindae
01-04-2005, 07:52 AM
lie
n.
A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.

He knew his statement was misunderstood. He knew the truth. It was technically a lie. A necessary lie but a lie none the less.

stillakid
01-04-2005, 08:51 AM
lie
n.
A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.

He knew his statement was misunderstood. He knew the truth. It was technically a lie. A necessary lie but a lie none the less.


No, that's not true. You say, "he knew the truth." Yeah, the truth from his (Ben's) Point of View was that Darth Vader murdered Anakin Skywalker. So, ergo, true. He wasn't lying. Why is this so difficult to comprehend? :confused:



Obi-Wan never claims to find Anakin. He says "When I first knew him...". He also never once said he decided to train Anakin. He says "I took it upon myself...", as if it was some sort of quest or burden. So everything Obi-Wan says is pretty much double talk to avoid telling the full truth. And wether or not he's a good man is also open to interpretation. Every man has faults, but until he fell to the Dark Side he could have been considered a 'Good Man', at least by comparison.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Not this again. ;)

But okay, for the kids who just joined us. Yeah, Obi Wan's statements in the OT are not backed up by what we see in the Prequels. Let's take each statement one at a time.

"When I first knew him..." Anakin was about 10 years old or so. They met after the Podrace and everything else that happened on Tatooine. The first thing Obi knew about Anakin was that he had a Midichlorian count that was off the charts. The only other thing he knew was that Anakin could've played Opie on the Andy Griffith show.

"...your father was already a great pilot..." Obi had no way to know this. He might have heard about the Podrace later on, but that's hearsay as far as he's concerned. The only other way Obi would have come to this conclusion was from Anakin's Naboo Starfighter escapade. But that was entirely by accident and the autopilot. Hardly an example of Anakin being a "great pilot."

"...but I was amazed at how strongly the Force was with him..." Really? How so, Obi Wan? What exactly did lil' Ani ever do at 10 years old that would show you how strongly the Force was with him? The Podrace? Why, old man, you never saw it. Did he move anything around? No. What about mind control? Not that either. Oh, the Midichlorian thing, you say. Does that show "how strongly the Force" is with someone? Well, no, not really. Apparently it is an indicator of someone's potential, but to say that the Force is with someone, and strongly at that, just because of a high Midichlorian count is a lie.

"I took it upon myself to train him as a Jedi." Really? You took it upon yourself? Seems to me that Qui Gon did that. See, he was the one who found the boy, saw what he could do, had the inclination that the boy might have potential, and decided to train him. Not only that, but Obi Wan continually questioned this decision throughout the story. He never supported it, especially for the reasons that Qui Gon gave. But he does eventually push to train Anakin, you say. Yes, he does. Why? Because Qui Gon asked him to. Not because Obi Wan wanted to do it because he "was amazed at how strongly the Force was with him." Obi did it, and stood firm against the Council, because of the promise he made to Qui Gon. Further, Obi Wan remains skeptical of this training throughout the whole of AOTC. He never wanted to do this save for keeping a promise. That's a far cry from taking it upon himself to train the boy as a Jedi.

"I thought I could teach him just as well as Yoda. I was wrong." (ROTJ)
"You will go to Dagobah and learn from the Jedi Master who instructed me." (ESB)

Per ESB, Yoda was Obi Wan's master. Per ROTJ, Obi Wan was young, rash, and perhaps slightly arrogant thinking that he could train Anakin just fine. It was Obi Wan's ego and lack of training skill that allows Anakin to be seduced by Palpatine.

However, per the Prequels, Yoda is NOT Obi Wan's master. Qui Gon is. Also, per the Prequels, Anakin does NOT succumb to the dark side because of a failing of Obi Wan or from seducing by Palpatine. Instead, Anakin turns from squeaky clean yippeeee kid in TPM to bi-polar arrogant brat in AOTC all on his own.

Anakin's turn to the darkside had nothing to do with Obi Wan or Palpatine. Anakin was going to be a menace no matter what. Therefore, pretty much nothing that Obi Wan says in the OT is backed up by what we see in the Prequels. Ah hah! you say. So Obi Wan is a rat-fink liar. If we use the Prequels in conjunction with the OT, yes. However, not one shred of character development anywhere else in the saga supports the notion that Obi Wan Kenobi is a liar. Nowhere does he mislead, lie, or otherwise distort in order to manipulate anyone or anything. To say that Obi Wan lied in a mean-spirited manner to Luke implies that Obi Wan is capable and willing to do that in every situation where it might serve him best. That just isn't so. Now, he does have a slight "moment" in Kamino where he goes along with the story to find out what's happening there. But again, it isn't enough to establish a manipulative precedent, at least not on the level that so many mistaken fans think.

But back to the core issue. Did Obi Wan LIE to Luke? No. Why? Because Obi Wan believed Anakin to be dead. His statements in ESB and ROTJ back this up. From Obi Wan's point of view, Anakin was dead. That's what he told Luke. Ergo, not a lie. Simple as that.

With that in mind, why didn't Ben just tell Luke the story that same way that he does in ROTJ? The whole "seduction" thing? Well, as many others have pointed out, Luke as a naive farmboy with a pretty limited understanding of the world, not unlike a few people I know. His mind didn't yet carry the capacity to truly understand the complexity of one personality dying while another takes it's place, as happened to Anakin. Had Old Ben told Luke, "Look, here's what happened..." Luke might have irrationally (or so Ben thought) thought that A)his father was really still alive, B)that his father might be happy to see him, C)that Luke could "get his dad back", and D)that Ben was the real murderer of his daddy. Well, Luke possessed none of the necessary skills, lightsaber and mental, that would be required to face Vader. Old Ben knew that. Telling Luke all the details at that point would have meant suicide for Luke or worse...Luke might be seduced to the Dark side before he even knew what it was. And being that Obi Wan had deposited the boy with his brother, Owen (yeah, his brother), and watched over him all these years, it is easy to conclude that Obi and Yoda had always hoped that Luke would someday be strong enough to become a Jedi and try to take on the Emperor and Vader. Of course, Old Ben thought that Anakin was really dead, so part of Luke's mission would be to kill the man in black. As we know, along the way, Luke got this crazy idea that "there is still good in him." Obi never believed it til the end. So telling Luke on Tatooine about Anakin's body being inside the Vader suit would have been too soon. Luke wasn't ready for it. And besides, again, Obi didn't believe that "the good man" who was Anakin was really there anyway. He had to wait until Luke truly understood how the Dark Side could take someone's soul away.

dindae
01-04-2005, 10:03 AM
No, that's not true. You say, "he knew the truth." Yeah, the truth from his (Ben's) Point of View was that Darth Vader murdered Anakin Skywalker. So, ergo, true. He wasn't lying. Why is this so difficult to comprehend? :confused:


The most important part of the definition that I gave was "Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression. " You can't tell me that Obi-Wan was not trying to give the wrong impression just like you can't tell me that Luke should have been able to figure out what he was truly saying. Otherwise when Vader said "I am your father" Luke would have just said "Yeah I know" and the audience would have known as well and this pivotal scene in the movie would just be a delay in an otherwise cool lightsaber fight. As far as Ben's point of veiw he knows that Anakin became Darth Vader. Now you can say murder can mean "to put an end to" and so you can say that Obi-Wan is factually correct in his statement, but his intention is to decieve and that is why it is a lie.

stillakid
01-04-2005, 11:12 AM
The most important part of the definition that I gave was "Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression. " You can't tell me that Obi-Wan was not trying to give the wrong impression
Well, yeah, I can. :) He told Luke that Anakin was killed by Darth Vader. From Obi Wan's point of view, that was entirely accurate. A little odd perhaps, to separate the personalities like that, but true nonetheless. Look at it this way, from the OT, we get the very distinct impression that Obi and Ani were really good friends. Now I know that the Prequels failed miserably to illustrate this, but from the OT, that is what we are meant to believe. So imagine if you will that your very best friend in the whole wide world came under the influence of some kind of cult or the like. That buddy you once roamed the woods with and shared all your best secrets suddenly became, in personality, someone else entirely. That "person" that you once knew was, for all intents and purposes, gone. And replaced by someone else, vile, evil. This isn't just a stranger that Obi Wan saw this happen to. Supposedly it was his "good friend." That's bound to be rather traumatic, so to ...compensate, if you will, for this alteration in his best friend, Obi's point of view tells him that Anakin is dead and gone...murdered by this other evil personality. To an outsider, this might seem like a manipulative lie, but to Old Ben, it was 100% truth. So, therefore, Ben was not lying. An outsider like you might look superficially at it and say he was, but there's alot going on there to take into consideration.



just like you can't tell me that Luke should have been able to figure out what he was truly saying.
Well, ...no. Luke had no reason to suspect that there was any other way to look at it at the time. With no historical context, all Luke knew was what Old Ben told him. So when Ben tells him that Vader murdered Anakin, what justification is there for Luke to dig any deeper for another point of view?


Otherwise when Vader said "I am your father" Luke would have just said "Yeah I know"
Again, until Vader tells him that in ESB, Luke as no reason to ever look at Old Ben's story from another point of view.


and the audience would have known as well
Well, the audience DOES know now because the Prequels are giving it away rendering this pivotal dramatic surprise entirely pointless. And I'm talking about fresh audiences who have never seen any of the movies, not the current ones who already obviously know. This is yet another huge failure of the so-called Prequels...giving away vital information before it is time.

But as to your point, you're right. If Old Ben had told Luke the whole story on Tatooine, then yeah, the surprise in ESB would have fallen flat (just like it will now because of the Prequels). But this is case in point for why the writers (Huyck, Katz, Kasdan) wrote these scenes the way they did. Fiction isn't just throwing a camera out there and capturing events the way they happen. That's a documentary. Fiction...good fiction...sets up dramatic plot points and pays them off in (hopefully) dramatic and entertaining fashion. Ben's point of view conveniently (for the story) left out some cool surprise details which sets up one of the best cliffhangers ever (since "who killed JR?"). And Ben's lack of complete information in ANH was justified by his relationship with Anakin (as described by the OT, not by the Prequels) and by Spirit Ben's explanation that it was the truth from his own point of view (as described in ROTJ). It all makes complete sense. :)


and this pivotal scene in the movie would just be a delay in an otherwise cool lightsaber fight. As far as Ben's point of veiw he knows that Anakin became Darth Vader. Now you can say murder can mean "to put an end to" and so you can say that Obi-Wan is factually correct in his statement, but his intention is to decieve and that is why it is a lie.
No, his intention wasn't to deceive. It was to give Luke the information he needed and could handle at that specific time. Later on, after he knew Luke could handle it, he told Luke the rest of the details, but it was in Luke's best interest to not know the specific events before he was mentally prepared to hear about it. It wasn't deception, therefore it wasn't a lie.

dindae
01-04-2005, 11:38 AM
No, his intention wasn't to deceive. It was to give Luke the information he needed and could handle at that specific time. Later on, after he knew Luke could handle it, he told Luke the rest of the details, but it was in Luke's best interest to not know the specific events before he was mentally prepared to hear about it. It wasn't deception, therefore it wasn't a lie.

How is it not deception? Here's another example that might prove my point. A guy goes to a strip club with some friends. His girlfriend asks him later what he did the night before. He says "I went out with a few freinds and had some drinks." This is technically not a lie but it is a deception because he knows his girlfriend would flip out if she knew the truth. But by leaving out the strip club detail she would think he just went to the local bar and hung out. Now I would never change the fact that Obi-Wan said what he did for any reason. But as noble as his reason are Luke took away the wrong image of what happened and Obi-Wan knew and more importantly he planned on it.

03springfield
01-04-2005, 01:21 PM
My best friend's wife went from normal kind considerate person to selfish bar & bed hopping tramp within a matter of months. When people ask me what happened to her, I don't tell them she's dead. That would be lying.

stillakid
01-04-2005, 01:26 PM
How is it not deception? Here's another example that might prove my point. A guy goes to a strip club with some friends. His girlfriend asks him later what he did the night before. He says "I went out with a few freinds and had some drinks." This is technically not a lie but it is a deception because he knows his girlfriend would flip out if she knew the truth. But by leaving out the strip club detail she would think he just went to the local bar and hung out. Now I would never change the fact that Obi-Wan said what he did for any reason. But as noble as his reason are Luke took away the wrong image of what happened and Obi-Wan knew and more importantly he planned on it.


This is technically not a lie.

Hey, you said it. I didn't. :D (Well, I did, but you just did too. ;) )

Look, I will admit that it's a bit of manipulation, but a lie...no. As stated, Ben hid Luke with his brother, Owen, and kept watch over him on a desolate planet far out of the way where Palpatine and Vader would never think to look (if they knew about the kids). Therefore it is logical to assume that Yoda and Ben both had it in mind to eventually bring Luke into the conflict and hopefully capitalize on his potential Force abilities. Why else would Ben hang around so close to Luke otherwise?

So, with that in mind, when Luke and his troubles fall into Old Ben's lap, and Luke pops the question about daddy, Obi Wan has to tell him something. He isn't about to lie to the kid, but he can't exactly tell him that daddy's body is running around with an evil personality in it. First of all, who would believe it? And second, he figured that a rash young naive Luke wouldn't understand the complexities of the bi-polar personality disorder that is inflicting Anakin and might rush off in a bid to reunite with daddy. Not only could Luke wind up dead, but worse, Vader and Palpatine would take advantage of Luke's youthful ignorance and undoubtedly turn Luke against Obi Wan (and the Rebellion). This, obviously, would be a bad course of action for Luke to take and Obi Wan could avoid sending Luke down that road by simply giving Luke the bare bones details about what happened to Anakin. All he needed to know at that point anyway. It wasn't a lie. Not exactly a deception either. He just left out a detail or two. But again, remember that Ben really truly believed Anakin to be dead...if not in body, at least in mind. And that's what's really important here. He told Luke that Vader murdered Anakin. And from a certain point of view, Obi Wan's point of view, that was 100% true. No lie. :D

stillakid
01-04-2005, 01:27 PM
My best friend's wife went from normal kind considerate person to selfish bar & bed hopping tramp within a matter of months. When people ask me what happened to her, I don't tell them she's dead. That would be lying.


Is she hot? And if yes, what's her number? :smoker:

Droid
01-04-2005, 01:35 PM
I have to agree with those who think Ben was lying. Let's look at what he said:

"A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights. He betrayed and murdered your father. Now the Jedi are all but extinct. Vader was seduced by the dark side of the Force."

Let's look at this. If we accept stillakid's premise that Obi-wan considered Anakin and Vader two distinct people, and that Anakin died when he became Vader, Ben's statement is still a lie. If we accept that in Ben's mind Anakin and Vader were two distinct people, Darth Vader was never a young Jedi. Anakin Skywalker was a young Jedi. Darth Vader was never a pupil of
Obi-wan's. Only Anakin was a pupil of Obi-wan's. Ben is clearly saying that Darth Vader was a young Jedi who was his pupil. That just doesn't match with the idea that Ben considered them two separate people. You can even see Alec Guiness thinking before he makes the statement, "What should I tell him? How should I phrase this?"

The argument for me is whether a half truth constitutes a lie. I think it does. If someone intentionally holds something back or phrases something in a certain way in order to technically not say something inaccurate, I think it is a lie. It was a well meaning lie. Luke couldn't handle the truth at that time. But it was a lie.

stillakid
01-04-2005, 01:43 PM
I have to agree with those who think Ben was lying. Let's look at what he said:

"A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights. He betrayed and murdered your father. Now the Jedi are all but extinct. Vader was seduced by the dark side of the Force."

Let's look at this. If we accept stillakid's premise that Obi-wan considered Anakin and Vader two distinct people, and that Anakin died when he became Vader, Ben's statement is still a lie. If we accept that in Ben's mind Anakin and Vader were two distinct people, Darth Vader was never a young Jedi. Anakin Skywalker was a young Jedi. Darth Vader was never a pupil of
Obi-wan's. Only Anakin was a pupil of Obi-wan's. Ben is clearly saying that Darth Vader was a young Jedi who was his pupil. That just doesn't match with the idea that Ben considered them two separate people. You can even see Alec Guiness thinking before he makes the statement, "What should I tell him? How should I phrase this?"
.

I'll go with that. :) However I still disagree that it was a "lie," as you bring up in part II of your post. Omission of detail does not constitute a lie.

But with your above post in mind, that line of reasoning must be extended throughout everything that Obi Wan says and does in the saga. Meaning, all that talk about Yoda being his master was then a lie, according to your argument. How can we trust anything that the ol' codger says if we take the specifics of what he says and ignore the principle behind it? :confused:

Beast
01-04-2005, 01:53 PM
Yay. It's become another "Stillakid Beats You Over the Head With His Opinion" Threads. :rolleyes:

BTW, Yoda was Obi-Wan's Master.... as a Youngling. Master Yoda instructed Ben in the principals of how to use the force. Nothing in the Prequals negates this, no matter how many times you love to bring it up. Obi-Wan was instructed by Yoda, and then taken under Qui-Gon's wing to complete his training. :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Droid
01-04-2005, 02:05 PM
But with your above post in mind, that line of reasoning must be extended throughout everything that Obi Wan says and does in the saga. Meaning, all that talk about Yoda being his master was then a lie, according to your argument. How can we trust anything that the ol' codger says if we take the specifics of what he says and ignore the principle behind it? :confused:

I was addressing this from a purely original trilogy "point of view". In the original trilogy there is no reason to believe that Yoda was not Obi-wan's master. We both know that the original trilogy and the prequels can not be reconciled unless you look at everything from an incredibly strained "point of view."

And yes, I do think that Obi-wan in the original trilogy is a very human character. He bends the truth sometimes if he thinks it is for the common good, but we can trust what he says because the original trilogy leads us to believe that he is an imperfect, but very good man. He failed to train Anakin, thereby dooming the galaxy and exiling himself. Gosh, the story of Obi-wan's tragic failure and how a good man and friend like Anakin turned to evil would have made a really great story. :rolleyes:

Droid
01-04-2005, 02:12 PM
BTW, Yoda was Obi-Wan's Master.... as a Youngling. Master Yoda instructed Ben in the principals of how to use the force. Nothing in the Prequals negates this, no matter how many times you love to bring it up. Obi-Wan was instructed by Yoda, and then taken under Qui-Gon's wing to complete his training. :p



I'm sure that stillakid is familiar with the prequel trilogy dialogue and expanded universe material that makes this distinction. I think his (and my) objection is that in the original trilogy the clear meaning of Obi-wan's statements is that Yoda was his master and that Qui-Gon was not.

dindae
01-04-2005, 02:20 PM
Hey stillakid what's your take on the whole "These aren't the droids you're looking for" line? :D

03springfield
01-04-2005, 02:25 PM
Omission of detail does not constitute a lie.



I wouldn't recommend testing that theory with wives, girlfriends or judges. Unless your last name is Clinton.

Beast
01-04-2005, 02:39 PM
I'm sure that stillakid is familiar with the prequel trilogy dialogue and expanded universe material that makes this distinction. I think his (and my) objection is that in the original trilogy the clear meaning of Obi-wan's statements is that Yoda was his master and that Qui-Gon was not.
I still fail to see how this troubles some people. There is no reason for Ben to go into his backstory of how he was trained by Yoda, and then his training was finished by Qui-Gon. Qui-Gon was dead, there was no way he was available to help Luke. So it makes no difference if he's not mentioned by Obi-Wan. Since he was informing Luke of who he had to seek out to complete his training. Hell, Obi-Wan never mentions Luke's mother either. Clearly since he never mentioned Luke having a mother, your logic says that she never existed and Luke and Leia are Clone Babies. :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Droid
01-04-2005, 03:29 PM
Obi-wan talks about how Yoda was his master. And then the prequels suggest it was really someone else. If Obi-wan had suggested that Luke's mother was Mon Mothma or something, and then we found it was Padme, yes I would have a problem with that. I know, I know, "point of view." Well from my point of view the prequels have some sloppy writing if their goal was to match up with the clear meaning of dialogue in the original trilogy.

stillakid
01-04-2005, 05:22 PM
Yay. It's become another "Stillakid Beats You Over the Head With His Opinion" Threads. :rolleyes:
You continue to provide hours...er, um, seconds...of amusement. :D


BTW, Yoda was Obi-Wan's Master.... as a Youngling. Master Yoda instructed Ben in the principals of how to use the force. Nothing in the Prequals negates this, no matter how many times you love to bring it up. Obi-Wan was instructed by Yoda, and then taken under Qui-Gon's wing to complete his training. :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks
Ah, no. Again. There is nothing...let me say that again...NOTHING in the prequels that supports what you just wrote up there. You've gone and taken one scene with a bunch of kids and assumed that it extends to Obi and Yoda.


I still fail to see how this troubles some people. There is no reason for Ben to go into his backstory of how he was trained by Yoda, and then his training was finished by Qui-Gon. Qui-Gon was dead, there was no way he was available to help Luke. So it makes no difference if he's not mentioned by Obi-Wan. Since he was informing Luke of who he had to seek out to complete his training. Hell, Obi-Wan never mentions Luke's mother either. Clearly since he never mentioned Luke having a mother, your logic says that she never existed and Luke and Leia are Clone Babies. :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks
It's troublesome (if we can really call it that) because it casts a dark shadow over Obi Wan that isn't really there. Just as the Greedo fires first fiasco entirely changed that character, implying that Obi Wan is a manipulative rat-fink liar changes the way the saga plays out. It is an unnecessary, and quite untrue supposition.

In 1980, there was no reason to go into the backstory of Qui Gon because there was no Qui Gon. I'd put a gazillion bucks on it that Qui Gon wasn't invented until sometime in the late '80s at the earliest. The dialogue in the OT fully supports this. Which is why the introduction of a new character in Episode I who runs around doing all the stuff that Obi Wan is supposed to be doing struck a lot of reasonable people as bizarre. "Where did this guy come from?" I heard time and again.

And your feeble attempt to use the "mother" as a parallel is just ridiculous and I suspect you know it. :rolleyes: The situation is entirely different. Spirit Ben said that Yoda was his master. No others. Period. Why would he say such a thing if it wasn't true? To expedite the story? Perhaps, but then he shoulda said, "You will learn from Yoda, a Jedi Master who instructed me." But whateva, we've been down this road a few times and you'll obviously never get it. Enjoy the flick, Obi-Haters! :p

mrpauldeeds
01-04-2005, 06:07 PM
He was just streching the truth. Luke wasnt ready to find out Vader was his father. SOme things are better off unknown.

Omega Wren 99
01-04-2005, 09:11 PM
JarJarBinks is correct concerning the issue of Yoda training the child jedis and then mentors taking over.

STAR WARS databank:
"Yoda served an important role in the Jedi Council. When young Padawans began their first foray into Jedi training, they did so under Yoda's guidance. Many of the Republic's greatest Jedi trained under Yoda when they were children -- schooled in groupings called clans. Once the Jedi hopefuls grew older, approaching their teenage years, they would then be paired to an elder Jedi Knight (http://www.starwars.com/databank/organization/thejediorder/) or Master to continue training one-on-one. "

So when Obi-Wan says his statement about training just a good as Yoda... it might have very well meant the pre-conditioning that Yoda did in the Order as the second stage of training.

Kyle Katarn
01-05-2005, 01:24 AM
He wasn't lying...he was telling the truth in another point of view. If he had told him the truth like we see it Luke would had been shocked...just imagine being a farmer and that they tell you that the most powerful man on the galaxy is your dad, and that he helped to kill many Jedi time ago...I would just poop in my boxers.

Astromech
01-05-2005, 02:51 AM
Philisophical response:
To call it lying is rather harsh. Obi-Wan was a teacher of jedi padawans. and in that order, you are as much like a parent as you are a teacher. Often times a parent must lie or hide the truth to protect a child. Or in some ways, not permiss undesireable behavior by telling them that their missing parent was a certain way (ie, alcoholic, abusive, dark lord of the sith, etc...). I think this is what Ben was getting at from a philisophical standpoint. Doing the old: "Yeah I knew your old man, he was a great guy" line. Knowing the raw talent and power Luke posessed, I would have done the same thing because a Dark Lord of the Sith is not going to make a good parent, and abandoned kids always want to find their parents.

Real world response:
Lucas was flying by the seat of his pants making a movie that almost didn't happen and ran out of money. He hadn't thought that far ahead and had to do some fancy footwork to fix the problems.

Kidhuman
01-05-2005, 08:12 AM
STAR WARS databank:
"Yoda served an important role in the Jedi Council. When young Padawans began their first foray into Jedi training, they did so under Yoda's guidance. Many of the Republic's greatest Jedi trained under Yoda when they were children -- schooled in groupings called clans. Once the Jedi hopefuls grew older, approaching their teenage years, they would then be paired to an elder Jedi Knight (http://www.starwars.com/databank/organization/thejediorder/) or Master to continue training one-on-one. "

.

The word many impllies most, but not all. Can we assume that Obi-Wan was trained, or was he left out of being trained by yoda. And when, o when did this data bank come out? I think it is safe to say that it came out well after the OT was made and done. There is still no decisive proof that Yoda trained Obi-Wan at any point.

dindae
01-05-2005, 08:36 AM
that depends on if you want to count the books. In the Jedi Apprentice series Obi is trained by yoda with other kids until he is sent off and later become Qui-Gon's padawan.

JediTricks
01-05-2005, 03:26 PM
So JJB, how did you vote, for "he's lying"? I'm not really clear on that from your first post there, you say he did but you give quite a reasonable explanation for why it's excusable and while I did specifically ask voters to remove any possible excuse issue from the voting, I also knew some couldn't.


Why this was ever a question boggles the mind. Old Ben wasn't "technically" lying or anything else underhanded. He told Luke the truth as he saw it: that the good man who was Anakin was killed by a bad man named Darth Vader. Now Ben did leave out that those two personalities happened to inhabit the same body, but as far as he (Ben) was concerned, it didn't matter. It's a question because if nothing else Ben didn't have 2 pupils, "Anakin" and "Darth" and thus thoroughly up to that "certain point of view" thing. While I also believe Ben wasn't lying, I can see several different reasons why others might believe he was and certainly not a set-in-stone issue.


So here's a question, if Ben had been 100% honest about Anakin/Vader all along, would Luke even know who Darth Vader is and what is role in the Empire was?
"Your dad is still alive, he's now a cyborg going by the name 'Darth Vader'."
"Wow, really? Who's that? A cyborg huh? Sounds neat, does he have a drink dispenser built into his arm or something? And that's a funny name, I wonder if he's still working on freighters, cyborg limbs would help a lot there I bet."
"Dumb kid. C'mon robots, let's get out of here while he's still talking."
;)


BTW, on the Yoda as Ben's Jedi instructor issue, since Lucas didn't have Qui-Gon in mind when even HE wrote the first few drafts of Episode I, I think the argument is moot, the character of Qui-Gon was thrown in hastily to replace the Obi-Wan character in that movie and therefore obviously isn't really meant to be Obi-Wan's main Jedi instructor. Not only that, if you look at the training Yoda gives Luke, it's beyond that Youngling training stuff, it's more akin to the same type of stuff that Qui-Gon was teaching Obi-Wan.


I'd put a gazillion bucks on it that Qui Gon wasn't invented until sometime in the late '80s at the earliest. Mid-'90s actually, Lucas didn't start writing the Ep 1 script till then and Qui-Gon wasn't in the first drafts of that.


And when, o when did this data bank come out? That DB entry came out in '02, specifically written about the scene in Ep 2.

OC47150
01-05-2005, 03:32 PM
that depends on if you want to count the books. In the Jedi Apprentice series Obi is trained by yoda with other kids until he is sent off and later become Qui-Gon's padawan.

That's how I've intrepreted it. Yoda teaches pre-padawans the basics of the Force and Jedi skills before the padawan is assigned to a master.

Kidhuman
01-05-2005, 07:53 PM
That DB entry came out in '02, specifically written about the scene in Ep 2.


SO, it was put out in 02, but before then the story remained the same. To me it was put there to cover Porgies butt.

stillakid
01-05-2005, 08:17 PM
So here's a question, if Ben had been 100% honest about Anakin/Vader all along, would Luke even know who Darth Vader is and what is role in the Empire was?
"Your dad is still alive, he's now a cyborg going by the name 'Darth Vader'."
"Wow, really? Who's that? A cyborg huh? Sounds neat, does he have a drink dispenser built into his arm or something? And that's a funny name, I wonder if he's still working on freighters, cyborg limbs would help a lot there I bet."
"Dumb kid. C'mon robots, let's get out of here while he's still talking."
;)


I like your version better. :)

Turambar
01-06-2005, 09:09 PM
Based on the trilogy, I would have said "no", he was not lying to luke, but firmly believed what he was saying.
If I were to accept the prequels as canon, however, I would think Obi Wan is a pathological fibber, or in ANH he is simply too senile to remember his tumultuous relationship with the arrogant punk as it actually was.

JediTricks
01-07-2005, 03:21 PM
SO, it was put out in 02, but before then the story remained the same. To me it was put there to cover Porgies butt.
It's incredibly common to have the site's official DB entries changed to reflect the "new revisioning" from a new film, I've come across several while trying to drum up info for threads here only to discover that what I had read has now been totally changed. It's kinda why I stopped using the DB entries completely over the last year, they're too unreliable for my tastes.

Looks like we have a solid count, 3/4ths of us feel Obi-Wan isn't lying while another quarter feel he is. I get the feeling that 1/4 is a little low, that some folks felt it was lying but was justified, there are a lot of posts here suggesting that, but in any event I guess Obi-Wan wins the day again.

DARKLORD_67
01-08-2005, 04:01 AM
My two cents:

From my own "... certain point of view..." Obi Wan Kenobi LIED, LIED, LIED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is real simple:

Did Obi-Wan Kenobi know (at the moment that Luke asked his question) that Anakin Skywalker (physically) became Darth Vader?

Ummm, yeah he DID!!!!!!!!

Therefore, when asked by Luke, "How did my father die?", and he responds that his father was killed by ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL known as Darth Vader, this was simply NOT TRUE!!!

We can split hairs all day and night about the "philisophical question" of "... the good man..." who was Luke's dad being "... destroyed..." at the moment that he fell to the dark side of the Force.

The bottom line is there ARE times when leaving out specific VITAL details of an anecdote amount to an innacurate and MISLEADING picture. In short: a LIE!!!!! This is what Obi Wan did.

The issue of this fib being necessary for Luke to hear at that stage of his development is a DIFFERENT matter altogether, people. I agree with many of you that the full truth at THAT moment probably would NOT be the best thing for Luke to hear. That doesn't change the fact that Obi-Wan KNOWINGLY misled Luke!

But on the question of Obi-Wan's initial statement, I suspect that Luke himself (if he really existed as a real person) would consider what Obi Wan told him to be a LIE!! Why else would he have such an accusatory tone with the specter of Kenobi when he confronts him on "truth" of this question?

Now all of this being said, I acknowledge that this issue, to some degree, is "interpretive". I've ALWAYS marveled at Alec Guiness' performance during that scene in A New Hope. To ME, he played that moment as though Luke's question caught him off guard, and his lie was a "comfortable" one that he produced on the cuff.

(In the context of the whole saga) Guiness performed that scene as if Kenobi had grown to think of Anakin (SPIRITUALLY) as another person from Vader. Observe the wistful, affectionate smile on his face as he speaks of Anakin as "... the best starpilot in the galaxy, and a cunning warrior..." and as a "... good friend..." Minutes later, observe the contempt and heartbreak that he exhibits as he speaks of Darth Vader.

Clearly, his lie FIT within his own philisophical Jedi belief, so he sold it with conviction. PHILISOPHICALLY, and SPIRITUALLY, he believed it himself. But it ALSO should be noted that he INTELLECTUALLY understood the "concrete, nuts and bolts" TRUTH that Anakin and Darth are PHISICALLY the same individual. That made his statement to Luke untrue.

In my opinion, to suggest that Obi-Wan did NOT lie about this issue suggests that he is somehow an unbalanced, pathological dreamer who is not playing with a full deck. I just don't see him that way.

Just because he had a spritual belief that allowed him to see Anakin and Darth and two seperate individuals, doesn't mean he was oblivious to the PHYSICAL truth of the matter that they were in-fact the same man.

In order for Obi-Wan's statement to Luke NOT to be an intentional lie, he would have to be UNAWARE of that physical truth. And we know this to NOT be the case.

-Roberto DARKLORD Williams

stillakid
01-08-2005, 12:29 PM
so he sold it with conviction.
He didn't "sell" anything. He simply told Luke what he believed to be truth. Saying "sell" like that denotes a connotation implying a manipulative scenario, not unlike a car-salesman who knows that the lemon in front of you won't last beyond the parking lot. That's not what Obi was saying.



PHILISOPHICALLY, and SPIRITUALLY, he believed it himself. But it ALSO should be noted that he INTELLECTUALLY understood the "concrete, nuts and bolts" TRUTH that Anakin and Darth are PHISICALLY the same individual.
There's no argument there, but...


That made his statement to Luke untrue.
...this isn't true. Just because there is a difference in the tangible, doesn't negate Obi's philosophical belief. That overrode the physical for Ben which is the point of view he placed more of a priority on at that time.


In my opinion, to suggest that Obi-Wan did NOT lie about this issue suggests that he is somehow an unbalanced, pathological dreamer who is not playing with a full deck. I just don't see him that way.
That's a bit harsh. But the antithesis of what you're suggesting is that Ben is a manipulative ratfink liar. While I don't agree at all with the "full deck" conclusion, it's more appropriate than Ben being manipulative ratfink liar. There is no evidence anywhere else in the saga of Ben being such an evil creep. As far as being off his rocker, he seems to be pretty coherent throughout ANH so being mentally unstable doesn't play out either.


Just because he had a spritual belief that allowed him to see Anakin and Darth and two seperate individuals, doesn't mean he was oblivious to the PHYSICAL truth of the matter that they were in-fact the same man.
True, and if that were the only issue at hand, then Ben could be considered a liar. But as stated, he took the higher road and realized that personality, more than physicality, makes the man. With "the good man" gone forever and Vader in his place, Anakin simply was dead and not coming back. It's this assumption on Obi Wan's part which sets up Luke's struggle to find out if "there is still good in him." Without Ben's fundamental belief as the opposing point of view toward the basic story conflict, Luke's epic struggle would have less resonance.


In order for Obi-Wan's statement to Luke NOT to be an intentional lie, he would have to be UNAWARE of that physical truth. And we know this to NOT be the case.
And that's just not true for the reasons I stated above. He can be aware of the physicality of the situation yet also believe fully that the personality is dead. They are not mutually exclusive.

...in my opinion. :D

DARKLORD_67
01-08-2005, 05:45 PM
Some interesting points there Stillakid.

I'd like to respond, if I may:

You say that the word "sell" “… denotes a connotation implying a manipulative scenario…” I contend that Obi-Wan DID manipulate Luke by telling him that his father was “murdered” when in fact he was still physically alive. And as I said before, judging by Luke’s agonized / accusatory tone at the close of The Empire Strikes Back and in Return of the Jedi, I’d say HE felt pretty manipulated by what he was told as well.

In my opinion, to make a statement that is only PARTIALLY true (even as the speaker sees it) IS "selling" something. In that scenario, the speaker must KNOWINGLY WITHOLD information as he makes his statement. The speaker must ALSO present his statement as if NOTHING else PERTINENT remains to be told. This could (and often DOES) give an inaccurate and downright UN-TRUTHFUL slant to the information that he does present.


I agree with you Stillakid when you write that “… Just because there is a difference in the tangible, doesn't negate Obi's philosophical belief…” In fact, I never implied that Obi-Wan's knowledge of the tangible SHOULD have negated his philisophical beliefs. I'm only saying that one in the ABSENCE of the other is NOT a full, balanced, TRUTHFUL picture. And in this particular instance, the two beliefs ARE INDEED mutually exclusive!!

If one is to believe (the statement) that the vile, selfish, angry individual known as Darth Vader "… murdered…" the noble jedi knight Anakin Skywalker, that LANGUAGE (to my mind) EXCLUDES a reference to a SPIRITUAL death. Even religious texts such as the Holy Bible or the Tora define "murder" as an act by ONE individual that ends the PHYSICAL LIFE of ANOTHER individual. And, of course, Anakin Skywalker / Darth Vader was NOT physically dead. A more accurate (truthful) word might have been "consumed" or even "possessed".

If, on the other hand, one is to wholy embrace the (truthful statement) that Anakin Skywalker "succumbed" to the Dark Side of the Force and spiritually "transformed" into Darth Vader, that LANGUAGE (to my mind) EXCLUDES a reference to a PHYSICAL death. THAT language points ONLY to a man's spiritual death and re-emergence as a different personality.

Since it is TRUE that Obi-Wan Kenobi KNEW BOTH of these things to be true (RE: Anakin / Darth is ALIVE - Darth spiritually consumes Anakin), AND
Since it is TRUE that Obi Wan is NOT pathological or mentally unbalanced, THEN...

It MUST follow that Obi-Wan KNOWINGLY neglected to mention part of the FULL TRUTH in his statement to Luke. Futhermore, he used language (re: "... mudered...") that strongly suggested a type of death that simply did NOT occur (physical). And he philosophically implied a death that, frankly, Luke WASN'T asking about (spiritual).

Were his intentions noble? Undoubtedly.
Did he do the "right thing" at that moment in telling Luke what he told him?
Probably.

Was it a lie?
Yes. A "white lie" perhaps, but STILL a lie!

I've never suggested that Obi-Wan Kenobi is an “evil creep” or a "rat-fink" liar, Stillakid. He’s just a gentle compassionate liar.

And, in my original posting, I believe I actually DISCOUNTED the possibility of him being "... mentally unstable..." It was my contention that ONLY by being mentally unstable, like a paranoid schizophrenic, (which I believe Obi-Wan is NOT) could he only PERIODICALLY REMEMBER the basic truth that Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader are physically the same individual.

IF he were INSANE (as a result of, say, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) and IF he could only PERIODICALLY remember this little nugget of truth about Darth / Anakin , and
IF at the moment of his statement to Luke he was having one of his memory "blackouts", THEN technically he would NOT be lieing because he would NOT know any better.

Since he is NOT crazy, and since he did NOT forget this vital piece of information, that means he KNOWINGLY withheld a BIG PART of the truth... a truth even as HE saw it!!! Furthermore, he designed the LANGUAGE of his statement to Luke to imply that Anakin and Darth VAder are physically two different people (which they are NOT). Give me a break!! ALL of this, by DEFINITION is a lie. Well-intentioned, but still a LIE!

You say that Obi-Wan Kenobi "...took the higher road and realized that personality, more than physicality, makes the man..."

Perhaps, but personality does NOT make the WHOLE man. Physicality is a big part of a man too. And Obi-Wan knew this! Besides, Luke’s straight-forward question was not an inquiry about “personality “ or “spritual” matters, for pete’s sake. In lieu of learning that his father was a “… great pilot… a cunning warrior…” , and a Jedi Knight who fought in the Clone Wars, Luke just wanted to know HOW his father physically DIED. Period.

… in my opinion
:)

stillakid
01-08-2005, 07:19 PM
If, on the other hand, one is to wholy embrace the (truthful statement) that Anakin Skywalker "succumbed" to the Dark Side of the Force and spiritually "transformed" into Darth Vader, that LANGUAGE (to my mind) EXCLUDES a reference to a PHYSICAL death. THAT language points ONLY to a man's spiritual death and re-emergence as a different personality.
...
It MUST follow that Obi-Wan KNOWINGLY neglected to mention part of the FULL TRUTH in his statement to Luke. Futhermore, he used language (re: "... mudered...") that strongly suggested a type of death that simply did NOT occur (physical). And he philosophically implied a death that, frankly, Luke WASN'T asking about (spiritual).

...Perhaps, but personality does NOT make the WHOLE man. Physicality is a big part of a man too. And Obi-Wan knew this! Besides, Luke’s straight-forward question was not an inquiry about “personality “ or “spritual” matters, for pete’s sake. In lieu of learning that his father was a “… great pilot… a cunning warrior…” , and a Jedi Knight who fought in the Clone Wars, Luke just wanted to know HOW his father physically DIED. Period.


And therein lies (no pun intended) the problem. All Luke asked was, "How did my father die?" Well, from Obi Wan's point of view, Luke's father, for all intents and purposes, died the moment that Darth Vader took hold. Ergo, not a lie.

So, given that, it has also been argued that Ben still lied because he also said that "a young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine..." implying that Darth Vader was Ben's pupil at a time when Anakin was supposed to be. But as we're seeing in the Prequels, Anakin is a scum bucket waaaaaaaaay before ever donning the mask and taking the name of Darth Vader. It wouldn't be out of the question to suggest that, again, for all intents and purposes Anakin really was dead sometime in the midst of AOTC and was Darth Vader even without the name and the mask. 20 years of hindsight and introspection about the events of that time very possibly could lead an old man to realize what happened and how he missed Anakin's fall. So by the time Luke wanders in asking the question, "How did my father die?" it is obvious to Ben that Anakin the person died long before he ever had the duel in ROTS. From the outside, from Luke's and the audience's point of view, it might appear to be a manipulative lie. But remember, Ben definitively said, "Luke, a great many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." And Ben's explanation in ANH was indeed from his very own understanding of what happened to Anakin...not the audience's or even how Luke might interpret it later. Those reactions have nothing to do with how BEN sees the situation. It truly is not a lie, rather it is his point of view. How we and Luke feel about it is immaterial.

DARKLORD_67
01-09-2005, 01:40 AM
Ummm... No.

It seems to me (and I think to MOST reasonable people) that the matter of someone's (physical) DEATH is really NOT debatable. One is either dead or NOT dead. There is no in-between.

Obi-Wan's mumbo jumbo answer that was explained away two films later as his "... certain point of view..." is nothing but a bunch of shuckin' and jiving, and hokey double-talk!!

If Obi-Wan somehow did NOT know that Luke was asking about his father's PHYSICAL state, then I could see there being room for interpretation. But that's just NOT the case.

Any reasonable person (including Obi-Wan himself) knows that physicality was specifically what Luke was asking about. I find this to be greatest liklihood, especially at a time in the galaxy when "spirituality" and "philosophy" are virtually DEAD concepts and what is emphasized and universally embraced is only the tangible, concrete, and physical.

If Luke were raised during the spiritual and philosophical times of the Jedi order, AND within their midst (not on some backwater planet on the outer rim), then his question (I suppose) might be interpreted in various ways. But he was a simple kid, leading a simple life, on a simple planet. And he asked a simple question ABOUT HIS FATHER'S PHYSICAL STATE.

Obi Wan is NO IDIOT! He KNEW what Luke was refering to when he asked his question. It's probably the main reason he looked so uncomfortable before his response. And when he did respond, he chose to IGNORE the obvious intent of Luke's question. He offered an interpretive answer to an non-interpretive question.
And his interpretive answer FLAT-OUT contradicts the truthful answer to the intended question. The language he INTENTIONALLY chose to use implied to LUKE that Anakin was PHYSICALLY DEAD when he was NOT. This fallacy was what Obi-Wan INTENDED for Luke to believe.

"A young Jedi named Darth Vader... betrayed and murdered your father"

No he didn't!!!!!!!! His other personality may have "betrayed" him, but Anakin wasn't "murdered"!!! And since the "murder" portion of his answer is the DIRECT response to Luke's intended question, then Obi-Wan WASN'T TELLING THE TRUTH!!

Anakin was "possessed", "consumed", "replaced", or (as Obi-Wan put it in EP 6 when he finally fessed up) "... BECAME Darth Vader..."

I'm sorry, but in MY book, to BECOME something is a far cry from being MURDERED by it !!!!! The two CAN'T simultaneously be true!

He lied.

Kidhuman
01-09-2005, 07:41 AM
But in a scitzo's mind, the person known as Anakin ceased to exist. Even Vader said that name means nothing to me. Therefore he indeed "murdered" Anakin and became Darth Vader.

Jedi Commando
01-09-2005, 09:53 AM
Bottom Line- Half truths and not adding all the truth= LIE
Don't read too much into it.




Star Wars is awesome but.....
Believe the truth.....
George Lucas died in 1983, not everything in Star Wars can be explained or ties into something else, GL makes a lot of this up as he goes!

DARKLORD_67
01-09-2005, 10:03 AM
Kidhuman, I think we've already established that Obi-Wan is likely NOT a schitzo.

And there is no evidence anywhere in the trilogy that Darth Vader himself is a schitzo. Besides which, Vader stating that the name Anakin Skywalker "... no longer has any meaning for me..." simply means that he abandoned that IDENTITY (and all it stood for) long ago. It does NOT mean or even imply that he ended the PHYSICAL LIFE of (murdered) another individual.

We cannot REASONABLY (or literally) look upon Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader as TWO SEPERATE PHYSICAL individuals (because they are NOT). They are only two seperate PERSONALITIES. It is these two seperate PERSONALITIES that Kenobi, Vader, Palpatine, and even Jedi Luke refer to when they speak PHILISOPHICALLY.

Darth Vader's (personality) REPLACED Anakin Skywalker's
Darth Vader's (personality) CONSUMED Anakin Skywalker's
Darth Vader's (personality) POSSESSED Anakin Skywalker's
Darth Vader's (personality) has FORGOTTEN Anakin Skywalker's (as Luke pointed out)

BUT

Darth Vader's (personality) could NOT have MURDERED Anakin Skywalker's.

Only a biological, physiological, organism can be "murdered" which is defined as "terminating the PHYSICAL life of". Personalities cannot be "murdered".

Luke's simple inquiry was about his father's LITERAL PHYSICAL death and NOT about his philosophical, spiritual death. This is NOT really open to interpretation. This question was coming from a simple non-spiritual, non-philosophical farmboy.

Which leads me back to my original point that clear-thinking, perfectly SANE Obi-Wan Kenobi understood this REASONABLE distinction. Therefore when he used the word "murder" to respond to Luke's simple (mistaken) inquiry about his father's death, he was intentionally being MISLEADING.

stillakid
01-09-2005, 11:00 AM
Darklord, your entire conclusion is based on how you interpret Luke's question and how you would want it answered. True, Luke's "intent" most likely was to ask about how his father physically died, being that his uncle Owen told him that Anakin was dead. But again, this was Obi Wan's point of view...and to him, Anakin was very dead even though the flesh remained. It was a perfectly reasonable and understandable answer to Luke's superficial question from Ben's point of view. Now the audience and Luke and anyone else outside of Ben's brain could easily look at it and say "LIAR!" So your conclusion is true, but only from your point of view. Not from Ben's. He was telling the truth from his point of view which means that he was not lying. It's an important distinction which was why Lawrence Kasdan wrote it that way for us to hear in '83.

DARKLORD_67
01-09-2005, 01:30 PM
My "interpretation" of Luke's question was shared by Obi-Wan. This is why he fessed-up in Return of the Jedi and told Luke the truth.

My PREFERENCE for how the question should be ANSWERED was not only shared by Luke (obviously), but it was also UNDERSTOOD by Obi-Wan. Why? Again, because he finally came clean on in Episode IV with an explanation and language that contradicted his original BS story!

I might buy what you're saying, Stilakid, IF Obi-Wan didn't do a complete 180 in Return of the Jedi and explained that it was ANAKIN who was seduced by the dark side of the force and BECAME Darth Vader. This is very different from "A young Jedi named DARTH VADER... betrayed and murdered your father"

Make up your mind Obi-Wan! You're NOT crazy. Either you philispohically see Darth and Anakin as two people or you do NOT. So exactly which of these two guys was seduced by the Dark Side?

In Episode VI, Obi Wan's explanation (point of view) of Anakin's fate is NOT that he was MURDERED, but instead that he was TRANSFORMED into someone else. THAT's HIS POINT OF VIEW. THAT'S HIS INTERPRETATION. So what does that make what he said in Episode IV ? It makes it lawyer double-talk, that's what!

I quote Luke's contemptuous disbelief in Return of the Jedi: "A certain point of view??!" If he had continued to speak, he might have added, "I didn't ask you about your personal pilosophical beliefs about my dad's fate. I asked you about his ACTUAL PHYSICAL fate. And YOU knew that!!"

I'm glad you mentioned Lawrence Kasdan. The truth is, on Return of the Jedi he wasn't much more than a Lucas lackey charged with turning George's general story outline into a finished screenplay. Kasdan had ALL sorts of DEFINITIVE ideas for where the story should go, and he was VETOED by Lucas often (his prerogative).

I'm willing to bet Kasdan had to perform some serious acrobatics on that Obi-Wan lie/truth question and came up with what he did. Talk about fitting a sqaure peg into a round hole! He had to write a screenplay that did NOT contradict Lucas' Episode IV screenplay even though Lucas shifted direction on the "Luke's father" issue when he made The Empire Strikes Back.

stillakid
01-09-2005, 03:48 PM
My "interpretation" of Luke's question was shared by Obi-Wan. This is why he fessed-up in Return of the Jedi and told Luke the truth.
No. It wasn't shared by Obi Wan at all. As you say below, it may have been understood by Obi Wan, but that doesn't mean Obi Wan shares that interpretation as his own. For instance, I can fully understand why Red Staters believe that they can be judgemental about certain things, but that doesn't mean that I share in those beliefs. Being aware of another point of view and sharing in it are two different things.


My PREFERENCE for how the question should be ANSWERED was not only shared by Luke (obviously), but it was also UNDERSTOOD by Obi-Wan. Why? Again, because he finally came clean on in Episode IV with an explanation and language that contradicted his original BS story!
He didn't "come clean." He just fleshed out the story with more details. He didn't change any of the fundamental elements of his original explanation.



I might buy what you're saying, Stilakid, IF Obi-Wan didn't do a complete 180 in Return of the Jedi and explained that it was ANAKIN who was seduced by the dark side of the force and BECAME Darth Vader. This is very different from "A young Jedi named DARTH VADER... betrayed and murdered your father"
Right, well, this is indeed the heart of the issue. ;) When did Anakin turn? Darth Vader (the personality) did indeed murder (kill) "the good man who was your father" (Anakin). The basis of that is correct from Ben's point of view. So it wasn't a 180 the way you describe it. It was a clarification of a more general story that he told back on Tatooine. :D


Make up your mind Obi-Wan! You're NOT crazy. Either you philispohically see Darth and Anakin as two people or you do NOT. So exactly which of these two guys was seduced by the Dark Side?
Well, Anakin was seduced by the Dark Side and became evil...ergo, became Darth Vader. But as explained, we can easily look to the existing Prequels to see that Anakin is an evil bastard already...even without the mask or the name. The "evil" ("a young Jedi named Darth Vader...") betrayed "the good man who was your father" (Anakin).




In Episode VI, Obi Wan's explanation (point of view) of Anakin's fate is NOT that he was MURDERED, but instead that he was TRANSFORMED into someone else. THAT's HIS POINT OF VIEW. THAT'S HIS INTERPRETATION. So what does that make what he said in Episode IV ? It makes it lawyer double-talk, that's what!
Well, from your point of view. ;) It sounds like double talk, mainly because you (and Luke) didn't like the feeling as if you were getting jerked around. But in the end, Ben's ANH limited explanation was for the greater good and the ROTJ clarification was appropriate for Luke's development. And still, both are compatible with the other, from Ben's point of view.


I quote Luke's contemptuous disbelief in Return of the Jedi: "A certain point of view??!" If he had continued to speak, he might have added, "I didn't ask you about your personal pilosophical beliefs about my dad's fate. I asked you about his ACTUAL PHYSICAL fate. And YOU knew that!!"
No, Luke didn't ask that specifically. While that part of the question is assumed to be rhetorical, part of Luke's lesson is not to assume anything. From Ben's point of view, Anakin was dead. To suggest to Luke anything else would be disingenuous as seen from Ben's point of view. Luke asked how his father died. The gist of the answer is that an evil named Vader killed him. For all intents and purposes for Ben and for Luke, that was true. For Ben, Anakin was dead and gone and never coming back. Telling Luke about the physicality part would have served no purpose and would have been a lie because from Ben's point of view, Anakin was dead. No matter how you slice it, Ben thought Anakin was dead and to suggest otherwise by fleshing out the details of physicality would have been the lie. Not the other way around.


I'm glad you mentioned Lawrence Kasdan. The truth is, on Return of the Jedi he wasn't much more than a Lucas lackey charged with turning George's general story outline into a finished screenplay. Kasdan had ALL sorts of DEFINITIVE ideas for where the story should go, and he was VETOED by Lucas often (his prerogative).
Lackey? Hardly. Have you ever read any of the raw stuff that George has written, meaning before it goes through polishing by better writers? George can't write, and moreso, he's admitted it frequently. THX was a critical and popular bomb. TPM was the same. AOTC was a close third except that he had "lackey" for that one. The rest of the resume was saved by the talented skills of Willard Huyck, Gloria Katz (American Graffiti, Star Wars), and Lawrence Kasdan (ESB, ROTJ). While Lucas remains a great "broad strokes" visionary, he frankly sucks at the details including basic plot structure and dialogue.


I'm willing to bet Kasdan had to perform some serious acrobatics on that Obi-Wan lie/truth question and came up with what he did. Talk about fitting a sqaure peg into a round hole! He had to write a screenplay that did NOT contradict Lucas' Episode IV screenplay even though Lucas shifted direction on the "Luke's father" issue when he made The Empire Strikes Back.
"Shifted direction?" You'll have to elaborate on that one for me.

As for the acrobatics, well, that's what a great writer can accomplish. But it wasn't that great of a stretch really. Ben had his point of view and later on explained it more fully to Luke. Luke seemed to get it without much trouble. Why can't a few fans?

DARKLORD_67
01-09-2005, 09:42 PM
Most (if not ALL) of the key players in this whole Anakin / Darth nonsense share the PERSONAL VIEWPOINT that Anakin and Darth were ONE MAN.

Let's take them one by one:

1) OBI-WAN KENOBI

Obi Wan's "fleshing out" of his tale (in Return of the Jedi) proves that he shared Luke's intention and (my) interpretation of the original question:

His words were, "Your father was seduced by the Dark Side of the Force. He CEASED TO BE Anakin Skywalker and BECAME Darth Vader."

This part of his newly "fleshed out answer" DIRECTLY ADDRESSES Luke's intention, and (my) interpretation of the original question, because it MAKES CLEAR that there was NO PHYSICAL DEATH involved in Anakin's fate. Sounds to me like according to OBI-WAN'S CERTAIN POINT OF VIEW, Anakin was NOT, in fact, physically "mudered", he was TRANSFORMED into someone else. He may have seen Anakin as "dead", but only from the standpoint of his PERSONALITY. I say again, a changed personality is NOT tantamount to "murder", even FROM OBI-WAN's POINT OF VIEW. He didn't even use the word "murder" during his "fleshed out" tale because IT'S NOT TRUE and IT'S INAPPROPRIATE to describe what happened to Anakin Skywalker!

Okay, what ELSE did Obi-Wan say during his "fleshed out" tale?

He said, "When that happened the good man who was your father was DESTROYED".

As established in previous posts, this part of his "fleshing out" DOES NOT address Luke's intention / interpretation of the original question. It is SPIRITUAL and PHILOSOPHICAL in nature, which was NOT Luke's intent. Also, even this part of his tale is inconsistent with what he told Luke back on Tatooine because he is not decribing a MURDER, He is describing the destruction of a personality, even from HIS OWN POINT OF VIEW. That's why he DIDN'T say, "When that happened, the good man who was your father was murdered."

Admittedly, even a non-biological entity (like say a CONCEPT or a FEELING) can be "killed". But ONLY a living, breathing, eating, sleeping, and crapping individual can be "MURDERED". This is defined as a termination of PHYSICAL LIFE!!!!!!!!!! Not a termination of personality. Not a termination of spirit.

"Killed" and "Murdered" are entirely two different things!!!!!!! Someone who has been "murdered" has DEFINITELY been "killed". But someone (or something) that has been "killed" has NOT NECESSARILY been "murdered". A person can be "killed" in a car crash. That's NOT "murder". A concept / idea can be "killed". But that's NOT "murder". "Murder" is a specific KIND of "killing". Not the other way around.


2) YODA THE JEDI MASTER:

Later in RETURN of the JEDI, when Luke asked a dying Yoda "Is DARTH VADER my father?", Yoda's (simple, straight-forward) response was "Your father he is". He DIDN'T say, "Your father he ONCE WAS." He DIDN'T say, "Your father he MURDERED." None of that CRAP. Why? 'Cause it just AIN'T TRUE!!! No shuckin' and jivin'. No lawyer double-talk "... from a certain point of view..."

Conclusion?: Yoda's VIEWPOINT is that Anakin and Darth are the SAME DUDE.

Let's move on.

3) DARTH VADER

I vehemently RESIST classifying Vader as some kind of a a Schizoid whack-job personality who sees himself as TWO people (the one he WAS, and the one he currently IS). The evidence simply doesn't bear that out.

Even Vader sees himself as ONE man! In the Empire Strikes BAck when he asked Luke what he knew about his dad, and Luke (wrongfully) accused him of murdering his father, WHAT WAS HIS RESPONSE??? It was, " No, I AM YOUR FATHER!" Darth Vader DID NOT say, "No, I WAS ONCE your father." He DID NOT say "Yes! You're right!! I MURDERED your punk-@$$ father, and then took his place !!" Why did he NOT say these things? 'Cause it WASN'T TRUE even from his own POINT OF VIEW.

Conclusion?: Vader's VIEWPOINT is that he and Anakin are one in the same.

Later on, in Return of the Jedi, he makes a philosophical reference (NOT a literal one) to the personality he USED to be when he went by the name Anakin Skywalker. (Re: "That name no longer has any meaning for me!") He rejects the possibility that that PERSONALITY could still be "alive" in him. But, my friends, when we use the word "ALIVE" in the context of describing a personality, we CLEARLY DO NOT MEAN that Anakin's personality once was a biological entity that had a pulse!!!

4) EMPEROR PALPATINE:

This is probably the ONLY player in this whole sorted business who CONSISTENTLY refers to Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader as TWO SEPERATE PEOPLE!!!! He does this even when he's speaking directly TO Vader!!!

Conclusion?: Palpatine's VIEWPOINT is that Darth and Anakin are two SEPERATE people. (That guy's a friggin' loon!!)


Looking to the prequels (specifically Episode II) to point to Anakin and call him "... an evil bastard..." is a bit harsh, and completely subjective. Furthermore, we DO NOT know at WHAT POINT in Anakin's development did (old) Obi-Wan consider him "fallen". I hardly think it was during the events of ATOC. Being arrogant and disobedient hardly quantifies as a "...fall from grace..." Even Anakin's slaughter of the Tusken Raider tribe is likely "understandable" by Obi-Wan since the boy's rage was sparked by the murder of his mother. Very similar to an enraged Obi-Wan Kenobi ferociously cutting Darth Maul in half to avenge his fallen master . If nothing else, Anakin Skywalker repeatedly stated that he thought of Obi-Wan as a FATHER. The boy came to Geonosis to help rescue a captured and condemned Obi-Wan Kenobi even though he was ordered by the Jedi council NOT TO GO THERE. He fought galantly during the battle, side-by-side with the Jedi Knights as one of their brave and noble ranks. Most importantly, he was known to have saved Obi-Wan Kenobi's hide AT LEAST TWICE in the film, and ONCE during an off-screen episode with a nest of Gundarks!! And don't forget that it was during Anakin's defense of an incapacitated Obi-Wan that his lost his arm in the duel with Count Dooku. By the end of the film Anakin Skywalker was still firmly a Jedi Knight! And when Episoide III opens later this year, we'll see that Anakin Skywalker is STILL a Jedi Knight fighting side by side with the order.

If you ask me, I think Obi-Wan treated that kid like CRAP all throughout Attack of the Clones. He would berate and belittle him publicly in front of others ("You will learn your place, young one"), and in private ("Your senses aren't that attuned, my young apprentice"). No matter what HERCULEAN efforts of selflessness or bravery the boy would make, it was never good enough. Obi-Wan was ALWAYS ready to cut him up: (Re: "What took you so long?" "Next time try not to lose this" "I was begining to wonder if you had gotten my message". (sarcastically) "Good job").

I think old Obi-Wan WAS telling the truth at least about one thing back on Tatooine: Anakin Skywalker WAS a good friend. A good enough friend that he DIDN'T just tell grouchy Kenobi to kiss his padawan @$$ and flip him the bird whenever he was laying into him like that!!

Attack of the Clones is a film that depicts Anakin Skywalker as headstrong, disobedient, and bratty (to be sure). But it also depicts him as hoplessly in love, brave, and loyal. Not at ALL an "... evil bastard..."

As to Lawrence Kasdan, you write:

"Lackey? Hardly. Have you ever read any of the raw stuff that George has written, meaning before it goes through polishing by better writers? George can't write, and moreso, he's admitted it frequently. THX was a critical and popular bomb."

No argument there.

"TPM was the same."

Well I LOVED it and so did MILLIONS of other folks. It's always puzzled me that if it was such a "popular bomb", why the $430 million + box office take? If it TRULY SUCKED as so many like to say it did, then why did they see it 10 and 20 times, contributing to its box-office take? Do you know how many times I go to see a movie that I HATE? Just once. The first time. After that, I say to myself "Gee, that SUCKED. I won't be going back to see THAT again! I've got better things to do with 10 bucks."

"AOTC was a close third"

I know many folks who consider Attack of the Clones the second BEST Star Wars film since Empire. And, again, I THOROUGHLY enjoyed it.

"While Lucas remains a great "broad strokes" visionary, he frankly sucks at the details including basic plot structure and dialogue."

True. And he brought in Kasdan to flesh things out in JEDI. But when the writer tired to do that, he was OFTEN vetoed over the direction he chose.

When I refered to Lucas' "shift of direction" regarding the "Darth is Luke's father question", what I mean is, Lucas' decision to move THAT way with the story was made during the development of The Empire Strikes Back. That means that when A New Hope was being made, Darth Vader was (at best) MAYBE Luke's dad, even in Lucas' mind! This "shift of narrative direction" caused Kasdan to do same fancy footwork when writing Kenobi's dialogue for JEDI so that he could reconcile him as a decent individual and not some rat-fink liar, liar, pants on fire... which he WAS! Well, maybe not the "rat-fink" part. ;)

Kidhuman
01-09-2005, 10:24 PM
Kidhuman, I think we've already established that Obi-Wan is likely NOT a schitzo.

Nope he wasnt. :D


And there is no evidence anywhere in the trilogy that Darth Vader himself is a schitzo. Besides which, Vader stating that the name Anakin Skywalker "... no longer has any meaning for me..." simply means that he abandoned that IDENTITY (and all it stood for) long ago. It does NOT mean or even imply that he ended the PHYSICAL LIFE of (murdered) another individual.

****zo, possible. Bi-Polar.....no question in my mind. When something has no meaning to you anymore it is dead. If you and your partner end a relationship you cease to exist as a couple therefore it is dead, killed, deceased. Murdered by one of the two involved or perhaps it was a double homocide of shared feelings.


We cannot REASONABLY (or literally) look upon Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader as TWO SEPERATE PHYSICAL individuals (because they are NOT). They are only two seperate PERSONALITIES. It is these two seperate PERSONALITIES that Kenobi, Vader, Palpatine, and even Jedi Luke refer to when they speak PHILISOPHICALLY.

Well, temporary insanity maybe??????

A court of law will look at a schitzo as having multiple personalities. Each one existing in there own plane of being. Why couldnt Anakin/Vader fall into this class?


Darth Vader's (personality) REPLACED Anakin Skywalker's
Darth Vader's (personality) CONSUMED Anakin Skywalker's
Darth Vader's (personality) POSSESSED Anakin Skywalker's
Darth Vader's (personality) has FORGOTTEN Anakin Skywalker's (as Luke pointed out)

Darth Vader's personality killed Anakin. He ceased to exist as Anakin and became Vader. See above explanation for that one.

BUT


Darth Vader's (personality) could NOT have MURDERED Anakin Skywalker's.

Only a biological, physiological, organism can be "murdered" which is defined as "terminating the PHYSICAL life of". Personalities cannot be "murdered".

See above for this one too.


Luke's simple inquiry was about his father's LITERAL PHYSICAL death and NOT about his philosophical, spiritual death. This is NOT really open to interpretation. This question was coming from a simple non-spiritual, non-philosophical farmboy.

Which leads me back to my original point that clear-thinking, perfectly SANE Obi-Wan Kenobi understood this REASONABLE distinction. Therefore when he used the word "murder" to respond to Luke's simple (mistaken) inquiry about his father's death, he was intentionally being MISLEADING.

AHA!!! So from a spiritual POV, Anakin was murdered. So again from a certain POV, Ben did not lie. If I say I ran a mile, butr really jogged, is that a lie. I didnt run full speed, more of a steady trot, but not a full out sprint, did I lie?

jjreason
01-16-2005, 12:43 PM
Yes, but they're lies of omission. Let's look at the circumstances again, shall we?

Obi Wan has been entrusted with the single-most important mission in the history of the Jedi order: the overseeing of Luke Skywalker from a "safe" distance, and when the time is right, the recruiting of him into the Jedi Order in hopes of saving the universe (so to speak).

Obi Wan lies to Luke about Darth Vader killing his father to motivate him in the proper direction. Is this reasonable, taking into account the entirety of the circumstances? To me, yes. By any means necessary Luke MUST be motivated against Darth Vader.

There might be an even more pressing "moral" dilemma for Obi Wan though. Is it reasonable to think that he may have known the Imperial Troops would locate and kill Owen and Beru? I think it's very likely. I think Obi Wan allows them to be destroyed by Imperials to finish motivating Luke to come with him. A heinous plan? It might sound that way, but again look at the totality of the circumstances. Is it reasonable to sacrifice 2 more lives in the pursuit of galactic well-being? I think so.

Does Obi Wan lie to Luke? Yes. Is he guilty of seemingly worse offences? Yes. Are his actions justified? Looking at the situation he was faced with, and the final result of the decisions he made - I would say so.

Jaff
01-26-2005, 09:59 AM
He’s a liar

I say this because Obi-Wan can never escape who he once was and how he feels about what he‘s done. That’s what makes the character of Obi-Wan so dimensional. Let me break it all down for those who are scratching their heads at my hypothesis.

1. To get to the end lets start at the beginning of Episode I. Obi-Wan is a know-it-all student. He is cocky (“The negotiations were short”), manipulative (many examples to follow), and self-opinionated (examples to follow).
2. “If they crush us they will find us and blast us to oblivion” This is Obi-Wan trying to manipulate Jar Jar by using his fear against him. His master does not condone this act. In the novelization of the film they go into detail about how Qui-Gonn disapproves, but for those of you who didn’t check out the book watch Obi-Wan’s grinning (aren’t you impressed master) look on his face.
3. Obi-Wan continues to be out of place by speaking when he’s not supposed to in Otah Gunga. “You and the Naboo form a ....” Look at Qui-Gonn’s (shut up boy) glance. Nass and Qui-Gonn are having the conversation, not his pupil. The book also goes into this scene in detail.
4. “Master we’re short on time!” He says this because he doesn’t really care about Jar Jar’s fate. To Obi-Wan Jar Jar is just a pathetic life form (stated later in the film). What Jedi should think that way!
5. “Why do I sense we’ve picked up another pathetic life form!” Forget the fact that this innocent boy saved him from exile. He’s less than Obi-Wan, and that’s all he knows.
6. “They will not go along with you this time!” Obi-Wan questioning his master again, acting like he knows what the council’s all about. Once again this is the cocky gesture of an unappreciative student.
7. The tension and division between Obi-Wan and Qui-Gonn is made clear in the council. Qui-Gonn clearly states to the council that “Obi-Wan is headstrong, and cannot learn more from him.” Obviously Qui-Gonn feels that Obi-Wan does not listen and is therefore is a failed student. Obi-Wan feels frustration at this as his face expresses in the moment.
8. “The boy is dangerous” Obi-Wan says this just three feet away from Anakin not caring if the boy heard him, or what he may feel about it. That’s why Ani comes right to Qui-Gonn feeling guilty and lonely stating “I don’t want to be a problem!”
9. “I am grateful you think I’m ready for the trials!” Obi-Wan probably feels very bad for the relationship he had with his master. Qui-Gonn feels it to, and at this gesture from Obi-Wan I bet Qui-Gonn felt there was hope for him still.
10. “Council has granted me permission to train you!” Anakin has no joy at that statement. He heard Obi-Wan stating that he was dangerous, and no doubt questions his sincerity.

After Episode I there is a clear tear between Obi-Wan and Anakin . I believe the reason for this is Obi-Wan’s sense of jealousy towards Anakin! I know many of you may feel opposite of this but I am unshakably certain that this is the case. 1st: Qui-Gonn really embraced Anakin’s presence, and this could have not been the case with Obi-Wan because Obi was more combative than attentive. Thus Obi probably feels that Quigy likes Ani more. 2nd Anakin is extraordinary and in episode I selfless. Obi-Wan just tries to coral his extraordinary abilities by “holding them back”. Qui-Gonn said trust your instincts (selfless) to Anakin. Now Obi-Wan says “control, control, control!” That may be Obi-Wan’s way, but it was never Anakin’s, or Qui-Gonn’s.

Jaff
01-26-2005, 10:01 AM
11. “You will learn your place young one!” Embarrassing Anakin is a good way to keep him in line. It’s a lesson that Anakin does need to learn for speaking out of place, but thanks to Obi-Wan they do have an adversarial relationship just as Obi-Wan had it with Qui-Gonn. Obi-Wan breeds this conflict. It was his nature.
12. “Dreams pass in time!” Ignoring the fact that Anakin may be psychically connected with his mother Obi-Wan just dismisses Anakin’s worries. You would think he would be concerned and would offer some consolidation.
13. Speeder chase - “Once again you’ve clearly shown....” Do you think Obi-Wan enjoys berating his student so that he feels really small. If this example isn’t good enough how about this one: “This weapon is your life!” How about lecturing him on not doing anything with Amidala rash without consulting him or the council. Obi’s a control freak nothing more, nothing less, which I am sure is why Yoda had misgivings about letting Obi teach this very instinctive boy.
14. On the Neimoidian home world Obi can’t locate Ani and immediately shows annoyance rather than concern. “Where in the blazes....”

In episode III the turn occurs as we all know. Anakin finally releases all his rejection onto everyone. Anakin never knew politics when he was on Tatooine. He was useful and loved. Qui-Gon accepted Ani like his mother and Watto. Then they pull him away from that. He goes to Coruscant where the council rejects him, and then Obi-Wan. He then goes into training and is restrained and lectured every moment. I can understand why Ani could turn and resent the Jedi enough to kill. There is only one person that supports Ani, and that’s Palpy. He offers no judgment and gives acceptance to Ani. It makes exact sense to why he switches sides.

After the turn Obi and Yoda are left stunned. “What did we do wrong?” Is probably running through their minds because no matter how much knowledge they possess they are not omnipotent. I bet Yoda and Obi come to the conclusion that Qui-Gonn was right about the way he perceived the force. He spoke of faith, hope and letting things occur as they will. The council looked at things politically (which was their doom). Rather than be observers to the system they were entwined with the system. Then there is Obi-Wan: Suppressive, judgmental, and superior in attitude. I’m sure Anakin’s turn hurt him deep, and in A New Hope he had made the understanding that he should have listened to Qui-Gonn and that he would not end up doing the same thing with Luke that he did with Ani. That’s why Ben is much more serene. He had faced his failures and accepted some of his past but not all of it, which takes us to 15.

15. “Vader betrayed and murdered your father.” I don’t think Obi-Wan ever came to terms that he is one of the main reasons Ani turned. As a teacher it would sting that his pupil ignored his teachings. It’s more his failing than Ani’s in his own mind. How could he tell the pupil’s son that he did not give his father the tools to not turn. Thus he twisted the truth. Later he pulled an old Obi-Wan trick by saying “Our truths we cling to are based on our own point of views”. That was a standard political statement to avoid fessing up to the question. I don’t think Ben wanted to use those kind of tactics with Luke but it had been such a constant in his life in the past that it crept out once in a while whether he meant it or not.

FINALLY - I think Ben gave into Darth more for an apology then to let Luke get away. Ben looked to Luke who was at the ramp of a ship that had no tractor beam to grab in, then back to Darth. Father and son are separated probably because he believes he was a main cause for it. He had been living with that real or imagined guilt for a long time, and now it was time for him to have faith (as Qui-Gonn said) to let things unravel. He set Luke on his path, and that’s all he needed to do. It was time for him to surrender to his past.

In the end I think Ben lied because of his own guilt. How could Ben come to terms from taking an innocent, giving boy and turning him into a frustrated, lonely man who holds onto resentment like it’s a medal.

OC47150
01-26-2005, 03:21 PM
Regarding point #7, Jaff, could it not be intrepreted as Obi-Wan outgrowing Qui-Gon and their teacher-pupil relationship and that Obi-Wan is ready to be on his own? Yes, Obi-Wan is a little arrogant and snobbish with some of his comments but that could be from being Qui-Gon's padawan for too long.

DARKLORD_67
01-29-2005, 03:02 AM
Jaff,

I want to be the first to publicly CONGRATULATE you on what is (in my opinion) one of the best written posts that I have ever read on this or any other STAR WARS forum.

Your points are EXTREMELY well-thought out, and beautifully expressed on this controversial STAR WARS topic. Like most others on this forum, I pride myself on being very well-versed in STAR WARS lore. But your incredibly insightful posts brought to mind things that I had not even considered (despite the fact that I whole-heartedly agree with you and see Obi-Wan as a liar).

If I could shake your hand, sir, I gladly would!! ;)

Very Best Regards,

2-1B
01-29-2005, 04:06 AM
I'm too late to vote but I would definitely go with "No, Obi-Wan was not lying."

He's more machine now, than man. Twisted and evil.
The good man who was your father was destroyed (and yes, I do see Anakin the Younger versions Jake.1 and Hayden.2 as a good man. ;)

Basically, it comes down to the philosophy of George Costanza on Seinfeld - "It's not a lie if you believe it."

Ben believed that this Vader entity emerged and killed Anakin.

Lie ? No.
Fib ? No.
Misleading ? Yes, in the sense that he said Vader was a pupil of Ben's BEFORE turning to evil.

If the poll asked Did Ben mislead Luke, then of course I would vote yes but I vote No here because of WHY Ben mislead Luke. The circumstances and events do not constitute a lie.

DARKLORD_67
01-30-2005, 08:14 AM
Basically, it comes down to the philosophy of George Costanza on Seinfeld - "It's not a lie if you believe it."

Sorry, but it's NOT that simple. When George Coztanza said those words on "Seinfeld", he was (as usual) trying to get away with something DISHONEST. He was splitting hairs and trying to come up with a JUSTIFICATION for something that just AINT TRUE. And THAT's the point.


Ben believed that this Vader entity emerged and killed Anakin.

No. He believed that Anakin Skywalker BECAME the Darth Vader "entity" which you describe. There's a BIG difference, even to HIM. These are his words, NOT mine.


Misleading ? Yes, in the sense that he said Vader was a pupil of Ben's BEFORE turning to evil.

If he truly "BELIEVED" in his heart of hearts the truth and integrity of his words to Luke back on Tatooine, then he would not feel he need to resort to the "misleading" tactics that you yourself admit he used (for whatever reason).

I fully accept that Ben saw things philosophically. Perhaps he did really believe (as he said in ROTJ) that Vader "destroyed" the good man named Anakin Skywalker when he emerged (out of Anakin himself). But that is a FAR CRY from what he said back on tatooine: "Vader... betrayed and MURDERED your father". "Murder" is defined as one individual ending the PHYSICAL life of another. Obi-Wan UNDERSTOOD that definition! That's why he did NOT repeat the usage of the word "murder" during his speech in ROTJ, and instead used (the more GENERAL word) "destroyed".

I say again: Murder is a specific KIND of destruction. NOT the other way around!! These two words are NOT interchangable, and they have different meanings and connotations. When a person is "murdered", they are certainly destroyed. And, ONLY a LIVING, PHYSICAL person can be "murdered", NOT their "personality".

But when a person, place, or thing is "destroyed" it is NOT NECESSARILY "murdered". A person can be destroyed if they accidentally fall into a vat of acid. A place can be destroyed during an earthquake. A bad FEELING can be destroyed with concentrated good-will. BUT NONE OF THIS IS "MURDER".

Since Obi-Wan intentionally AVOIDED the word "murder" during his ROTJ explanation, I have to believe that he HIMSELF really did NOT believe the CRAP he was feeding Luke back on Tatooine.

As I see it, Obi-Wan's intentional, misleading usage of the word "murder" back on Tatooine cements his response to Luke AS A LIE! Furthermore, he used that word after MANIPULATING / MISLEADING Luke with language that suggested that DArth VAder and Anakin Skywalker were PHYSICALLY two different men (making a "murder" entirely possible):

"A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil..." (suggested that there were OTHER "pupils" when there was in fact ONLY ONE)

If one were to argue that Obi-Wan supposedly really did perceive Anakin and Darth as TWO seperate men, then he still LIED back on Tatooine: The fact is (from Obi-Wan's perspective) Darth Vader was NEVER a "pupil" of his!! Anakin Skywalker was. Darth Vader was NOT a good man who "... turned to evil". He was a brutal, angry Sith Lord and Obi-Wan's sworn enemy FROM THE MOMENT BE WAS "BORN". And it wasn't "Vader..." who "... was "seduced" by the Dark Side of the Force", it was Anakin!! According to HIM (in JEDI), It was Anakin who was the "good man", remember?

What a load!

Fib? Yes.
Lie? Yes.
Misleading? You betcha!

Kidhuman
01-30-2005, 08:20 AM
What is wrong with Ben thinking Vader murdered Anakin? It is his POV and he stands by it. It basically happened that way. The evil part of him(Vader) overthrew all logical sense and he truly became Vader. There was no sign of Anakin at all until Luke showed up and messed with the mans head some more. The only thing is we shpould now see his head explode on the DS2 because of Luke getting in there and messing with it deeper.

DARKLORD_67
01-31-2005, 03:29 AM
What is wrong with Ben thinking Vader murdered Anakin? It is his POV and he stands by it. It basically happened that way.
There is NOTHING "wrong" with Ben thinking that... except the fact that HE DIDN'T think it (back on Tatooine), he does NOT stand by it, and it DIDN'T HAPPEN that way, "basically" or otherwise. It is NOT... (I say again) NOT HIS POINT OF VIEW! Proof? "Your father was SEDUCED by the Dark Side of the Force. He CEASED TO BE Anakin Skywalker and BECAME DArth Vader."

Gee... I heard no mention at all of a "murder"... There's no corpse. Obi-WAN mentions a LOT of stuff happening to Anakin here: "Seduced", "Ceased to be", "Became" , and yet... NO MENTION OF MURDER!! Hmmm... Interesting. "Stands by" his POV, you say?


The evil part of him(Vader) overthrew all logical sense and he truly became Vader.
Yeah that IS true. He BECAME Vader (as you and Obi-Wan pointed out). But that's NOT a "murder"... even from Obi-Wan's point of view. That's why he amended his story in JEDI to use the (more general) word "destroyed" to decribe what happened to Anakin's PERSONALITY. And the destruction of a personality is NOT MURDER, even from Obi-Wan's point of view.

DARKLORD_67
08-20-2005, 07:47 AM
The controversial nature of this topic has made it very clear, at least to me, that the definitions of WORDS, and the precise usage of LANGUAGE are of paramount importance when determining if someone has told a lie.

A “lie” can very broadly be defined not only by what the speaker says, but also by HOW it is said… by which things are emphasized or de-emphasized. A lie can just as easily be identified by what the speaker DOESN’T say as it is but what he does say.

Body language comes into play too. Those of us that work in law enforcement are TRAINED to identify the textbook mannerisms that identify an individual who wishes to mislead, misdirect, and / or give a FALSE impression through the use of gestures, facial expressions, or body movements .

The question we all grapple with when engaged in this debate is a very basic one: Is it possible to “lie” to someone by INTENTIONALLY omitting pertinent information during a statement? Can even “truthful” words be considered a lie IF their intent is to give a false impression?

My own answer to both questions is an emphatic YES!

You see, a lie is NOT exclusively defined by the false WORDS that a human being utters. In the largest sense, it is instead defined by the FALSE, MISLEADING IMPRESSION that a human being wishes to give to another via ANY available form of human interaction. Human interaction, with it’s myriads of subtleties and facets, is so complex a thing that this fact is inescapable.

That being said, when debating this STAR WARS-based issue, ask yourself (regardless of the reason) if it was it Obi-Wan Kenobi’s INTENT to mislead Luke Skywalker and give him a FALSE impression when he said that Anakin Skywalker was “… betrayed and murdered…” by Darth Vader.
Even those who have posted in this thread defending Kenobi admit that he WAS intending to mislead the boy. The idea that he was doing it with words that he philosophically believed to be “true” is irrelevant.

Moreover, as I’ve said before, it was Kenobi’s LANGUAGE that cemented his statement to Luke as a lie. His use of the word “murder” to describe Anakin Skywalker’s fate was not only misleading, and false, it was downright contrary to his OWN beliefs.

Obi-Wan Kenobi understood the DEFINITION and CONNOTATION of the word “murder” and intentionally used it to give Luke A FALSE IMPRESSION about the “death” of Anakin Skywalker. Later (in Return of the Jedi) when he “clarified” his story for an indignant Luke, he completely AVOIDED using the word “murder” to describe Anakin Skywalker’s fate since (even in his OWN belief system) it was NOT APPLICABLE.

In virtually every known realm of human understanding, a “murder” is defined as the INTENTIONAL termination of the PHYSICAL life of one individual as the DIRECT RESULT of ANOTHER individual’s (the murderer’s) actions.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to “murder” a concept, a place, or (as in this case) a “spirit” or a “personality”.

Some of the respondents to this post have accused Luke of not being specific enough with his initial question when he asked how his father “died”. I obviously disagree. And certainly there are several ways that a person can “die”. A person can “die” spiritually when they are wholly consumed by a new personality (as Anakin Skywalker appeared to have been). A person can also “die” physically as Yoda did laying peacefully in his bed on Dagobah. A Person can also “be killed” (which is different from “dying”), as Lt. Jek Porkins was when his X-Wing Fighter was destroyed by turbo laser fire.

Yet not a single one of those examples can even remotely be considered a “murder”.

These subtle (and not so subtle) distinctions of language DID NOT escape Obi-Wan Kenobi’s understanding, and I see no evidence anywhere in the saga that he rejected them from his own belief system. If anything, old Ben had grown to be a master manipulator of the spoken (and unspoken word).

Does that make him a rat-fink LIAR, or an evil twisted creep? Of course not. It just makes him human.

Then there is the issue of Obi-Wan Kenobi’s NEED to mislead Luke by being “cryptic” . It has been suggested here by several of Kenobi’s defenders that it was necessary to avoid telling Luke the full truth about his father at THAT point in his development.

I have come to disagree.

Luke Skywalker showed himself to be a remarkably emotionally stable young man (bordering on detached) when you examine his behavior in A New Hope. Mere HOURS after seeing the charred corpses of the only people whom he had ever known and loved as “parents”, Luke showed no trace of typical human grief adjustment or trauma. As to the question of Anakin’s “death”, there is nothing that suggests to me that Luke would have become a distraught mess had he been told immediately about his father’s true fate. This boy never knew his father and really had no emotional connection to him. All he knew about the man was the blatant falsehood perpetuated by Owen Lars that he was a navigator on a spice freighter. I’m relatively certain that if Kenobi had given Luke his full truthful statement (as he expressed it in Return of the Jedi), that the boy would have been horrified (at first) to learn of his father’s fate. But then, he would have sucked it up and moved on … even if it meant possibly facing off against his father, the enemy agent of the empire that he proclaimed to hate.

The sad part is Kenobi told Luke what he did back on Tatooine more for himself than for Luke’s sake. He shoulders an enormous burden of guilt over what happened to Anakin Skywalker and blames himself for his friend’s fall. The truth of the matter is even though Obi-Wan most definitely had a hand in Anakin’s fate, in the end the CHOICE to embrace the Dark Side of the Force was Skywalker’s, and Skywalker’s ALONE. It was a choice born entirely out of fear and selfishness. Like Princess Leia said years later, he followed his OWN path, no one chose it for him. Tragically, his was a path wrought with pain, isolation, greed, rage, and blind lust for power.

Having said all of this, my conclusion about the veracity (or lack thereof) of Ben Kenobi’s words remains unchanged. He LIED to Luke Skywalker plain and simple. He lied from his OWN point of view, and he lied from Luke’s. He lied whether his viewpoint was that Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader were spiritually TWO DIFFERENT individuals, or whether his viewpoint was that they were physically ONE BODY.

Just for fun, let’s examine his LIE word for word, shall we? And let’s make this examination from the viewpoint (supposedly Ob-Wan’s) that Anakin and Darth are SPIRITUALLY TWO SEPARATE men:


LUKE: How did my father die?

OBI-WAN: (PAUSE) A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights. He betrayed and murdered your father. Now the Jedi are all but extinct. Vader was seduced by the Dark Side of the Force.


OKAY STOP!!! If Anakin and Darth are SPIRITUALLY TWO DIFFERENT men, then this statement is WHOLLY UNTRUE even from Obi-Wan Kenobi’s viewpoint:

1) “Darth Vader” was NEVER a Jedi. Anakin Skywalker was the Jedi
2) “Darth Vader” was never Obi-Wan’s “pupil”. Anakin was the “pupil”
3) “Darth Vader” didn’t “turn to evil”. Anakin turned to evil after he was seduced by the Dark Side of the force.
4) Darth Vader didn’t “murder” Anakin Skywalker. This is impossible since they are physically the SAME MAN. SPIRITUALLY speaking, Darth Vader did appear to “destroy” Anakin’s spirit. But, once again, that is NOT a “murder”, even by Obi-Wan’s definition. There’s no PHYSICAL corpse.

Then, there is the matter of the subtle misleading IMPRESSIONS that Kenobi creates here for Luke with his masterful language manipulation. By claiming that Vader was “…a pupil of mine…”, Ben subtly creates the notion that there was MORE THAN ONE student under his care. Disagree with me? Fine. The next time you introduce your wife to some new friends, try presenting her as, “Hi. This is Lucy. She’s a wife of mine.” Trust me, you’ll quickly end up in the DOGHOUSE!!

Why is Kenobi’s false notion of more than one student so important? Well, because if there is more than one student to speak of, then it is fully PLAUSIBLE for one not only to “betray” another but also to “murder” him.



Now let’s examine the exact same dialogue from the more “tangible” universal viewpoint that Darth Vader and Anakin Skywalker are PHYSICALLY the same individual:

LUKE: How did my father die?

OBI-WAN: (PAUSE) A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights. He betrayed and murdered your father. Now the Jedi are all but extinct. Vader was seduced by the Dark Side of the Force.

OKAY STOP!!! With Darth and Anakin physically being the same man, the KEY portion of this statement is total bull.

1) An individual cannot “murder” themselves PHYSICALLY. We call that “suicide”, and THAT didn’t happen here either.


So what COULD HAVE Kenobi said that wasn’t a lie or misleading and that also did NOT contradict his spiritual viewpoint? How about this:

LUKE: How did my father die?

OBI-WAN: (PAUSE) Your father… died when he turned to evil and became Darth Vader, a Dark Lord of the Sith. Vader has helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights, and in doing so has betrayed and destroyed everything good and decent that your father Anakin once stood for. He’s more machine now than man. He’s become twisted and evil. (SIGHS) Anakin… was seduced by the Dark Side of the Force.

LUKE: The Force?

OBI-WAN: The force is what gives a Jedi his power. It’s an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us, and penetrates us. It binds the galaxy together.

2-1B
08-20-2005, 10:24 AM
Sorry, but it's NOT that simple. When George Coztanza said those words on "Seinfeld", he was (as usual) trying to get away with something DISHONEST. He was splitting hairs and trying to come up with a JUSTIFICATION for something that just AINT TRUE. And THAT's the point.

Whoa, easy there fella ! I didn't realize that a reference to the very silly Seinfeld would be taken so seriously. lol

Aside from being creeped out by an overuse of capitalized words ;), I'll just say that Obi also told Luke "what I told you was true, from a certain point of view." Did he mislead Luke ? Yes, absolutely . . . but it wasn't a flat out lie, Ben's quote above shows that.

Leia telling Tarkin the Rebels are on Dantooine = a lie.

Ben telling Luke his father was betrayed and murdered by Vader = a misleading statement based on truth told from a certain point of view, one that is not literal.

Your literal breakdown of the language isn't really applicable here since Ben himself is not speaking literally. :)

JimJamBonds
08-20-2005, 03:39 PM
Caesar, George Carlin would be all over your ash. lol

DARKLORD_67
08-27-2005, 02:54 PM
Whoa, easy there fella ! I didn't realize that a reference to the very silly Seinfeld would be taken so seriously. lol

Whoa, lighten-up, fella. I didn't take the Sienfeld reference "seriously". I was simply AMUSED by the fact that you would use one of the most decietful, underhanded, and dishonest characters in all of TV sit-com history to prove your point about Obi-Wan NOT having lied.


Aside from being creeped out by an overuse of capitalized words ;), I'll just say that Obi also told Luke "what I told you was true, from a certain point of view." Did he mislead Luke ? Yes, absolutely . . . but it wasn't a flat out lie, Ben's quote above shows that.

Sorry. Didn't mean to "creep you out" by my (over)use of capitalized words. I'm even sorrier that the LARGER point that I was making about what "constitues" a "lie" seems to have escaped you totally, despite my captialized emphasis.

What good is referencing Obi-Wan's quote from Return of the Jedi in an effort to show me that he is not a liar? To me, that quote is coming from a defensive, indignant man / ghost who is being accused of being a liar (just as I would have accused him).

Just because Obi-Wan SAYS he didn't lie doesn't automatically mean that he didn't. He was human. He was not "above" lying. It is his intent at the moment that he made his statement to Luke on Tatooine that I am considering. And that "intent" (even by YOUR definition) was designed to mislead. I am not interested in his justification for why he misled Luke because that wasn't the question of this topic. I am further not interested in his "fancy footwork" as he explains how what he said back on Tatooine was NOT a lie. Every liar, if given the chance, will explain how their lie was NOT a lie. I'm not impressed.


Leia telling Tarkin the Rebels are on Dantooine = a lie.

I fail to see why you are able to identify Leia's intent to mislead Tarkin as a "Lie", and yet cannot do the same regarding Obi-Wan's statement.

According to the way hairs are split around here, Princess Leia's statement was as much "the truth" as Obi-Wan's statement was about Luke's dad. Tarkin's question to Leia was simply 'Where is the Rebel Base?" He wasn't more specific than that. From Leia's "point of view" her response could very well have been considered "the truth". She responded that the Rebels were on Dantooine... and they were... at one time. But not anymore. And sure enough, Imperial scouts ships discovered the remains of a Rebel base on Dantooine. So at the time Tarkin asked his question, there WAS a rebel base on Dantooine... it was just a deserted one.

Give me a break. As far as I'm concerned, all this hair-splitting is purely and simply a smelly load of crap.


Your literal breakdown of the language isn't really applicable here since Ben himself is not speaking literally. :)

Yes but he designed the LANGUAGE of his statement to appear "literal" to Luke. Hence his misleading lie.

Look, as I said before, this is clearly a disagreement of belief system. In MY OWN belief system, a "lie" is much more broadly defined than it is in your own system.

I vehemently feel that to "mislead" someone (even with words that the speaker believes have truth to them) is still A LIE. Furthermore, I don't even believe that "words" are required to be spoken for a "lie" to be constituted.

For you, on the other hand, "a lie" seems to be based purely on the belief system of the speaker regardless of his intent.





"Pete, it's a fool who looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart. Now... What the hell is that singin'?"

--Ulysses Everett McGill-- lol

2-1B
08-27-2005, 10:19 PM
Whoa, lighten-up, fella. I didn't take the Sienfeld reference "seriously".

Sure you did, as evidenced by your very next sentence:


I was simply AMUSED by the fact that you would use one of the most decietful, underhanded, and dishonest characters in all of TV sit-com history to prove your point about Obi-Wan NOT having lied.

"Prove my point" ? ? ? Hardly, that was hardly my intention. It was a ****ing JOKE to introduce my post, so get over it. lol Need a ladder ? lol


I'm even sorrier that the LARGER point that I was making about what "constitues" a "lie" seems to have escaped you totally, despite my captialized emphasis.

What good is referencing Obi-Wan's quote from Return of the Jedi in an effort to show me that he is not a liar?

Because he flat out says that what he told Luke was "true." KH had a nice post about that up above. :)


To me, that quote is coming from a defensive, indignant man / ghost who is being accused of being a liar (just as I would have accused him).

That's funny that you belittled me earlier by saying I missed your point, yet here you don't see Luke's point at all. ;) Ben wasn't accused of being a liar there, nope. Luke was salty that Ben didn't tell him the whole truth but beyond that he wanted clarification of the answer Yoda gave him that Vader was indeed Luke's father. Enter the Spirit of Ben for a little history lesson. :)


Every liar, if given the chance, will explain how their lie was NOT a lie. I'm not impressed.

I'm not impressed either that you are taking a beloved and kind old man character and indicting him this way, lumping him in with other liars as if he's Bill Clinton or R. Milhouse Nixon. lol lol lol


I fail to see why you are able to identify Leia's intent to mislead Tarkin as a "Lie", and yet cannot do the same regarding Obi-Wan's statement.

According to the way hairs are split around here, Princess Leia's statement was as much "the truth" as Obi-Wan's statement was about Luke's dad. Tarkin's question to Leia was simply 'Where is the Rebel Base?" He wasn't more specific than that. From Leia's "point of view" her response could very well have been considered "the truth". She responded that the Rebels were on Dantooine... and they were... at one time. But not anymore. And sure enough, Imperial scouts ships discovered the remains of a Rebel base on Dantooine. So at the time Tarkin asked his question, there WAS a rebel base on Dantooine... it was just a deserted one.

She said "they're on Dantooine." meaning "they are on Dantooine." Yes, Tarkin asked where is the hidden rebel base and she didn't say they have a base on Dantooine (which could be occupied or deserted) she said that they are on Dantooine. Lie. :)


Give me a break. As far as I'm concerned, all this hair-splitting is purely and simply a smelly load of crap.

Coming from Brooklyn, that must be a pretty damning statement. :thumbsup:

DARKLORD_67
08-28-2005, 06:24 AM
Sure you did, as evidenced by your very next sentence:

No, I REALLY didn't. I truly was amused.




"Prove my point" ? ? ? Hardly, that was hardly my intention. It was a ****ing JOKE to introduce my post, so get over it. lol Need a ladder ? lol

I'm sorry. You're right. You were not "proving your point" with the Seinfeld reference. You were MAKING your point by using the Sienfeld reference as an example. My bad. That did come out wrong, so my apologies :thumbsup:

"Get over it" you say? Geez... I didn't realize that I was "under it". But you're absolutely correct if you imply that I can sometimes take stuff a bit too seriously. It's a character flaw that I'm working on. Apologies again.

As to the "ladder" offer... Actually I DO need one. I've got a LOT of construction work going on around the house and I could really use a good one. I kinda have my eye on the LITTLE GIANT LADDER SYSTEM (as seen on TV). It's just the neatest thing you ever saw:

http://www.as-seen-on-tv-store-1.com/little-giant-ladder-system.asp

lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol



That's funny that you belittled me earlier by saying I missed your point, yet here you don't see Luke's point at all. ;) Ben wasn't accused of being a liar there, nope. Luke was salty that Ben didn't tell him the whole truth but beyond that he wanted clarification of the answer Yoda gave him that Vader was indeed Luke's father. Enter the Spirit of Ben for a little history lesson. :)

"Belittled you"? Oh, man. Caesar I'm sincerely sorry if you got the impression that I was doing that. Really. I find you to be a thoughtful, articulate, and insightful debater. I can come off very brash at times in my written word, and I can see how you got that impression. Once again my deepest apologies.

Now whether or not Ben was accused of being a liar by Luke in that scene in Return of the Jedi (like many other things) is probably a matter of perception wouldn't you agree? I mean, the way I saw the scene Luke was VERY accusatory and indignant as he asked, "Why didn't you tell me? You told me Vader betrayed and murdered my father."

After Obi-Wan told his tale and explained that he told the truth from a "certain point of view", Luke's "A certain point of view?!" was dripping with RESENTMENT over having been misled (lied to), AND RESENTMENT over Obi-Wan's apparent LACK of remorse over being misleading about such a painful and vital issue. That line spoke VOLUMES to me because it implied that Luke was mostly hurt NOT by the truth that Darth Vader was indeed his father, but by the fact that Obi-Wan misled him about it. Observe Luke's pained anguish aboard the Millennium Falcon at the end of The Empire Stikes Back: "Ben... why didn't you tell me?" Also observe Obi-Wan Kenobi's ghostly SILENCE in that same moment. Now imagine the despair, betrayal, and isolation that Luke Skywalker, battered and defeated, must have felt at that silence.

To ME, the implication of Luke's line is that (HE feels) that "the truth" about someone's state of mortality is NOT a question open to interpretation. One is either "murdered" or "not murdered". And Obi-Wan dismisses Luke's hurt by basically telling him to get over it, and then changing the subject to focus more on details about Anakin Skywalker. He does this KNOWING that Luke's curiosity to learn more about his father will likely dissipate his momentary resentment. And that is precisely what happened. If you read this scene in the Return of the Jedi novelization, I think you can kind of see what I mean. As I recall, there is more dialogue that fleshes out the scene, and Obi-Wan may even have acknowledged that Luke felt lied to.

Now again, this is only MY OWN INTERPRETATION of how that scene played out on screen. Someone else watching that scene obviously may get a different interpretation.




I'm not impressed either that you are taking a beloved and kind old man character and indicting him this way, lumping him in with other liars as if he's Bill Clinton or R. Milhouse Nixon. lol lol lol

Yes I agree with you, Caesar. Ben Obi-Wan Kenobi (in the Original Trilogy) is indeed a beloved and kind old man. But I do not consider it to be a contradiction to say that he also lied about the issue of Luke's father's fate. Both are not mutually exclusive.

You see, I am NOT "indicting" Kenobi as some kind of horrible person. EVERYONE at many points in their life are called upon to lie, bend the truth, mislead, or whatever else you want to call it. That doesn't necessarily make someone a terrible person. Good, decent people lie all the time. Like you, I truly do see Obi-Wan Kenobi as a kind old man. He is also flawed, because he is human. And he is subject to all the imperfections of being human. I find this to be especially true after seeing the Prequel trilogy and learning what kind of a man he was in his youth. He DEFINITELY became a kinder, more compassionate human being as he aged. And his final sacrificial act as a human being was a selfless and compassionate one borne out of wisdom and love.




She said "they're on Dantooine." meaning "they are on Dantooine." Yes, Tarkin asked where is the hidden rebel base and she didn't say they have a base on Dantooine (which could be occupied or deserted) she said that they are on Dantooine. Lie. :)

Okay. You're right.




Coming from Brooklyn, that must be a pretty damning statement. :thumbsup:

lol lol lol Bwaaaahhh, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, lol lol lol lol lol lol
Good one Caesar!! You got me there!!! Touche!!!! But uh, actually, my neighborhood is Brooklyn has actually gotten QUITE nice. Not "smelly" at all. Gentrification and all, y' understand... Heh... :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:






"Hey mister. I don't mean to be tellin' tales outta school, but there's a fella in there that'll pay you ten dollars if'n you sing into his can"

--Delmar--