Star Wars General Discussion Thread

[TheColorPurple]

Hey, everyone, before the "Unpopular opinions we have on fiction" thread turns into more discussions on Star Wars (or my peculiar views on abstract art) I've decided to make a general discussion thread for Star Wars where we can talk about the general topics of the franchise and its fandom.

Anyways, so with Star Wars Celebration cancelled, it seems that we'll only have the High Republic books to really get into and talk about. As of me typing this out, the current Covid-19 pandemic is hurting nations like Brazil and the United States quite a bit and it seems that this has put a halt to a lot of Star Wars content that was originally slated to either be revealed or be released in this year of 2020. That said, as long as the employees at Disney and Lucasfilm are doing well and are safe and sound, then I've got not qualms with any delays. It's just a space opera, after all.

Anyways, I'm really excited for the High Republic novels and I hope that we at least get more information on The Mandalorian season 2 later on.

Also, let's try to keep as much of the discussion on the sequel trilogy here as possible, at least assuming that we don't just decide to make another thread specifically for the sequel trilogy to keep discussion there eventually.

 

[Althaea]

A link to the Unpopular Opinions thread, to roughly where the multi-page discussion started.

Did we actually get an explanation as to why the galactic peacekeepers had a melee laser sword as their primary weapon?

Click to shrink...

I thought it was fairly clear that it's a defensive weapon? There's a quote about that somewhere. Always for defense, never for attack? Vaguely silly and over-the-top Legends material aside, lightsabers allow you to deflect blaster shots. Between that and the small, unassuming size of an inactive lightsaber, it seems like an ideal weapon for someone who is ostensibly a diplomat and monk first, and a peacekeeper second.

This doesn't fit with how they were typically used in the movies, where deflections generally precede a charge and a quick killing blow, but it's a sound principle. And it might be a lethal weapon in of itself, but between the Force, and often their own skills and physique, a Jedi theoretically has a lot of ways to subdue opponents non-lethally, even ignoring the daft "sever limbs and replace them with cybernetics" argument that's apparently canon.

For that matter, even IRL a sword is principally more defensive than most other melee weapons. Quarterstaffs are better, but are also more cumbersome, and from a soldiering perspective are somewhat harder to combine with a shield.

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

I guess I'm dragging the endless arguments with deranged anti-Jedi fanatics over here, then:

Star Wars:

1. The Jedi did not have it coming.
2. The prequel Jedi Order is fine and doesn't need "reform" (at least in the canon timeline). Most proposed reforms are to either do something the Jedi canonically already do, stop doing something they canonically don't do, or to "just do" something that is actually way more complicated and difficult than the author thinks (e.g.: end slavery: and who is going to keep it abolished?). Sometimes bad things happen to good people.
3. Most anti-Jedi rants, at least in fandom, (IC or OOC) are total fucking bullshit that exists to justify edgy protagonists doing edgy things.
4. The Jedi Council are not assholes, and are generally if not universally great people.
5. Sith are, in fact, The Worst.
6. Dooku, Anakin Skywalker, and Ben Solo are all responsible for their own decisions and also all know that they would be welcomed back if they chose to come back despite all the horrible things they've done. They just don't want to.
7. Jango Fett is a terrible person and people should stop putting "and then we put Jango in charge of Mandalore" on their bucket list. Obi-Wan's girlfriend doesn't need replacing, even in continuities where Jango is Mandalorian and not just a cosplayer.

Click to shrink...

[a bunch of arguing happened in the middle here]

But where is it ever said that non-married romantic relationships are fine? Where is someone's steady, non-toxic relationship to provide context and not make us go "yeah, celibacy sucks and they're pushing that on everyone."

Not wanting your wife unborn child to die is... not irredeemable possessive and selfish, you know? Not saying it's OK to dismember small children, but it doesn't strike me as something the Jedi would be right to condemn on and of itself.

Click to shrink...

• Do we ever see a toilet in the Jedi Temple? Does the absence of onscreen toilets mean that Jedi aren't allowed to poop? No. You don't need to have ordinary fucking things shown to know that they exist.
• The problem isn't that Anakin doesn't want Padme to die, it's the lengths he is willing to go to to stop that! Obi-Wan and Yoda didn't want the Jedi Order to die, but they didn't fucking massacre unrelated individuals to try to prove themselves to a Sith Lord so he would teach them how to reanimate corpses or something!

Well people are criticizing the jedi, in the movies, and you keep bringing out of movie references, so clearly you can't "understand" the movies without outside references.

Click to shrink...

The movies make sense without the out-of-movie references, because none of those things actually changes the message of the movies!

The degree of stanning that Mace Windu and Ki-Adi Mundi do for Dooku at the beginning of Attack of the Clones makes it very clear that Jedi are allowed to leave if they don't like it!

What you need the out-of-movie references for is Internet arguments about details of the Jedi Order that have no meaningful impact on the plot of the movies!

Except the jedi aren't written or directed like normal folks with magic power and ect. They're presented like weird stifled asshats with no common sense and a bunch of freaky philosophies based on frankly stupid logic.

Click to shrink...

You know what?

Just because they try to control themselves like grown-ass adults and don't scream their lungs out in fury whenever someone tells them "no" doesn't mean they're "stifled asshats"

And I just like the Sith more because they don't try to balance. Balance is not always achievable. And two opposing things like emotion and 'logic or reason' shouldn't try to come together in happy moderate marriage. IMO. The Sith were the more interesting faction to me. Maybe not in the originals tho, but even still, I don't remember the two big Jedi besides Luke--Yoda and Obi-Wan--showing much dramatic range in their emotions. Maybe I remembered wrong IDK.

Click to shrink...

Yes those two things fucking should come together! If you want emotions but don't want to be a wild animal incapable of functioning in any kind of reasonable civilization or a narcissistic abuser, you're going to need to get some control of yourself!

EDIT: The Sith may be the more "interesting" faction, but... may you live in "interesting" times? ( except not, because I don't actually want to, and we're living in the same times. )

 

[Valmond]

The movies make sense without the out-of-movie references, because none of those things actually changes the message of the movies!

Click to shrink...

And part of the message seems to be "Jedi are messed up".

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

And part of the message seems to be "Jedi are messed up".

Click to shrink...

 

[bluntblade]

There aren't toilets in old Star Wars or Lord of the Rings either, but they clue me in to the emotional baselines of their societies. The Jedi are a monastic order of wizard-warriors, I.E. not a totally normal thing.

Furthermore, a prohibition on marriage would be a kind of normal thing in that context; hence most of us interpret it that way. An ethos which says root who you like but don't catch feelings and marriage is inherently corrupting... that's not normal to us, and we ought to be clued in on it just as Fury Road quickly sketches the Citadel's society for its audience.

Also, I'm not anti-Jedi. I said they had some fatal flaws which led to their tragic downfall, which is tragic because they were good overall.

 

[Althaea]

TBH I've never felt that the distinction between attachment/possession and love was particularly complicated? If you accept that all things die, eventually, you don't even have to see death as a natural or desirable part of life in order to understand why the Jedi discourage attachment.

Being able to let go is a core virtue of one of the largest religious faiths in the world.

 

[bluntblade]

TBH I've never felt that the distinction between attachment/possession and love was particularly complicated? If you accept that all things die, eventually, you don't even have to see death as a natural or desirable part of life in order to understand why the Jedi discourage attachment.

Being able to let go is a core virtue of one of the largest religious faiths in the world.

Click to shrink...

The original argument was over it being too woolly and vague. Anakin never once defines what attachment means in this.

For me, the Jedi recruiting children is much like the bit in ASoIaF where Barristan reflects that it's a bit harsh to have someone swear themselves to the single life and/or celibacy before they're old enough to even want those things.

 

[Valmond]

Click to shrink...

*points at the prequels & other people who have brought criticism of the jedi in them*

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

There aren't toilets in old Star Wars or Lord of the Rings either, but they clue me in to the emotional baselines of their societies. The Jedi are a monastic order of wizard-warriors, I.E. not a totally normal thing.

Furthermore, a prohibition on marriage would be a kind of normal thing in that context; hence most of us interpret it that way. An ethos which says root who you like but don't catch feelings and marriage is inherently corrupting... that's not normal to us, and we ought to be clued in on it just as Fury Road quickly sketches the Citadel's society for its audience.

Also, I'm not anti-Jedi. I said they had some fatal flaws which led to their tragic downfall, which is tragic because they were good overall.

Click to shrink...

• That isn't a Jedi thing, it's a Star Wars movies generally don't show romance except between main characters thing. You're applying a double standard to Jedi vs everyone else.
• The prohibition against marriage is plot-relevant, and a deviation from what a typical reasonable person would expect by assuming "normal people but with magic and laser swords and a fancy job", which is why it's mentioned.

*points at the prequels & other people who have brought criticism of the jedi in them*

Click to shrink...

Show me some scenes. If the entire prequels are evidence, it should be easy.

 

[Valmond]

Show me some scenes.

Click to shrink...

No.
People have made plenty of arguments, you keep retreating to extended universe materials for your counter arguments.
Unless you can respond to the peoples arguments using the actual films, we're done.

 

[bluntblade]

• That isn't a Jedi thing, it's a Star Wars movies generally don't show romance except between main characters thing. You're applying a double standard to Jedi vs everyone else.
• The prohibition against marriage is plot-relevant, and a deviation from what a typical reasonable person would expect by assuming "normal people but with magic and laser swords and a fancy job", which is why it's mentioned.

Click to shrink...

The Jedi are different, though. Everyone else lives in a society which I broadly recognise, they do not.

Wait, what? Where's the whole angle you were pushing about this only being Anakin's problem and how it was totally possible and acceptable for Jedi to do romance despite us never seeing it? Because that was the context we needed to see to believe.

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

The original argument was over it being too woolly and vague. Anakin never once defines what attachment means in this.

For me, the Jedi recruiting children is much like the bit in ASoIaF where Barristan reflects that it's a bit harsh to have someone swear themselves to the single life and/or celibacy before they're old enough to even want those things.

Click to shrink...

• Movies: Jedi can leave.
• Expanded Canon: also it's not a llife of celibacy and the Jedi are pretty fucking awesome parents.

No.
People have made plenty of arguments, you keep retreating to extended universe materials for your counter arguments.
Unless you can respond to the peoples arguments using the actual films, we're done.

Click to shrink...

I've repeatedly shown scenes of Jedi showing emotion, despite it being a default assumption that shouldn't need evidence, and I've repeatedly pointed to quotes saying Jedi are allowed to love.

You are the one spewing arguments without evidence.

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

Click to shrink...

--------------

The Jedi are different, though. Everyone else lives in a society which I broadly recognise, they do not.

Click to shrink...

Ah, so you're a xenophobe who assumes that if people deviate from expectations in one way, they're automatically weird and totally unrelateable aliens who don't do anything unless explicitly shown to do so, but don't hold portrayals of anyone else to the same standard?

Why does this not apply to pooping?

EDIT:

The Jedi are different, though. Everyone else lives in a society which I broadly recognise, they do not.

Wait, what? Where's the whole angle you were pushing about this only being Anakin's problem and how it was totally possible and acceptable for Jedi to do romance despite us never seeing it? Because that was the context we needed to see to believe.

Click to shrink...

Given the lack of non-Jedi romance on-screen in the prequels, this isn't a Jedi issue, it's a Star Wars thing, so please stop acting like it's some super-special Jedi-only issue.

 

[Valmond]

I've repeatedly shown scenes of Jedi showing emotion

Click to shrink...

Holy shit, living people have emmotions, stop the presses.
No, the Jedi are not messed up because they have no emmotions.
Hope you atleast got a good price on the straw.

 

[bluntblade]

First - we have specified consistently that this needs to be dramatised within the immediate canon, and as TRoS has illustrated, a story which requires I do homework to make sense is broken.

As for the xenophobia, well I have voted Tory so yeah I guess you've got me there- no. Fuck no. My point is that it's outside my cultural frame of reference, so they need to be shown not meeting those expectations. Otherwise yes, my expectations will be projected because they're coded as monks and within my Western native paradigm, monks don't fuck or marry. Hence I assume a kriffing celibacy rule.

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

Holy shit, living people have emmotions, stop the presses.
No, the Jedi are not messed up because they have no emmotions.
Hope you atleast got a good price on the straw.

Click to shrink...

Sorry, I mixed you up with some of the other people. Perils of arguing with four people at once.

I assumed you were supporting or one of the people who were claiming that the Jedi were "weird stifled asshats" or something.

What plot-relevant aspects of the prequels were you saying aren't adequately explained by what's going on on-screen?

First - we have specified consistently that this needs to be dramatised within the immediate canon, and as TRoS has illustrated, a story which requires I do homework to make sense is broken.

As for the xenophobia, well I have voted Tory- no. Fuck no. My point is that it's outside my cultural frame of reference, so they need to be shown not meeting those expectations. Otherwise yes, my expectations will be projected because they're coded as monks and monks don't fuck or marry. Hence I assume a kriffing celibacy rule.

Click to shrink...

Western Monks also don't run the fuck around with laser-swords or negotiate trade disputes or investigate crimes. They sit in monasteries and read and write and pray or something.

Jedi are called knights and the things they actually do in the plot of the prequels don't feel like western monks at all! They're basically space cops and diplomats with magic powers who try not to be abusive assholes.

And you know what? Whether Jedi are expected to be celibate isn't even fucking plot relevant to the movies!

 

[Valmond]

I don't assume celibacy rule just because they are a monastic order.
But having a rule of "no attachments" and specifically "no marriage", leads to some questions when applied to humans, makes celibacy rule make sense.
That the word attachment needs further clarification is an issue when it is not forthcoming.

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

I don't assume celibacy rule just because they are a monastic order.
But having a rule of "no attachments" and specifically "no marriage", leads to some questions when applied to humans, makes celibacy rule make sense.
That the word attachment needs further clarification is an issue when it is not forthcoming.

Click to shrink...

It would be an issue if celibacy actually changed the plot or meaning of the prequels.

It doesn't, so it doesn't need to be on-screen.

 

[bluntblade]

Western Monks also don't run the fuck around with laser-swords or negotiate trade disputes or investigate crimes. They sit in monasteries and read and write and pray or something.

Jedi are called knights and the things they actually do in the plot of the prequels don't feel like western monks at all! They're basically space cops and diplomats with magic powers who try not to be abusive assholes.

And you know what? Whether Jedi are expected to be celibate isn't even fucking plot relevant to the movies!

Click to shrink...

This only proves my point. The Jedi are a weird amalgam of holy knights and other orders, ergo they are outside our ready frame of reference so I want some demonstration of how they roll.

And it is relevant, because Anakin and Padme's love is forbidden and that causes half the problems in the sodding films. And the most obvious conclusion to draw, from the clues we are given, is that the Jedi aren't allowed romantic relations.

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

This only proves my point. The Jedi are a weird amalgam of holy knights and other orders, ergo they are outside our ready frame of reference so I want some demonstration of how they roll.

And it is relevant, because Anakin and Padme's love is forbidden and that causes half the problems in the sodding films. And the most obvious conclusion to draw, from the clues we are given, is that the Jedi aren't allowed romantic relations.

Click to shrink...

Whether Jedi are allowed non-married, non-possessive romantic or sexual relations doesn't affect the plot because Anakin literally married Padme and we know something there is forbidden. He's doing a forbidden thing without leaving the Jedi either way!

EDIT: But while we're asking non-plot relevant questions: does Yoda poop? Humans do, but Yoda is a weird knee-high troll who is never shown to poop on-screen, so by your logic we can't really know.

 

[bluntblade]

Whether Jedi are allowed non-married, non-possessive romantic or sexual relations doesn't affect the plot because Anakin literally married Padme and we know something there is forbidden. He's doing a forbidden thing without leaving the Jedi either way!

Click to shrink...

But the thing is that we're at least theoretically on Anakin's side in large part because the need for love, for most people, is kind of a primal, fundamental thing. So lots of us count that as a strike against The Jedi Did Nothing Wrong.

Having no context doesn't affect the plot but it affects the story because it impinges on our emotional responses.

In the same way that Canto Bight is tangential to the plot of TLJ, but integral to the themes and story.

 

[Valmond]

Whether Jedi are allowed non-married, non-possessive romantic or sexual relations doesn't affect the plot because Anakin literally married Padme and we know something there is forbidden. He's doing a forbidden thing without leaving the Jedi either way!

Click to shrink...

Jedi being celibate or not is relevant to our understanding of the marriage and the Jedi.
If celibacy is not required, but marriage is forbidden, it tells us that Jedi consider marriage itself a bad thing for some reason.
The nebulous nature of the word attachments, and how Yoda deals with Anakin having visions about her mother (basicly telling him to ignore them), further raises questions about the Jedi order and their "no messed upness".

 

[bluntblade]

Hell yeah. Obi-Wan doesn't go "when this is done, we'll go to Tatooine and find her" when foresight in dreams is absolutely a thing.

Heck, in Labyrinth of Evil he castigated himself for that.

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

But the thing is that we're at least theoretically on Anakin's side in large part because the need for love, for most people, is kind of a primal, fundamental thing. So lots of us count that as a strike against The Jedi Did Nothing Wrong.

Having no context doesn't affect the plot but it affects the story because it impinges on our emotional responses.

In the same way that Canto Bight is tangential to the plot of TLJ, but integral to the themes and story.

Click to shrink...

Whether The Jedi Did Nothing Wrong is actually completely irrelevant to the plot.

What matters to the plot is that they aren't horrible monsters whose existence is anathema to a healthy functioning society.

Jedi being celibate or not is relevant to our understanding of the marriage and the Jedi.
If celibacy is not required, but marriage is forbidden, it tells us that Jedi consider marriage itself a bad thing for some reason.
The nebulous nature of the word attachments, and how Yoda deals with Anakin having visions about her mother (basicly telling him to ignore them), further raises questions about the Jedi order and their "no messed upness".

Click to shrink...

Hell yeah. Obi-Wan doesn't go "when this is done, we'll go to Tatooine and find her" when foresight in dreams is absolutely a thing.

Heck, in Labyrinth of Evil he castigated himself for that.

Click to shrink...

• Anakin talks to Obi-Wan about his visions about his mother, not Yoda
• Anakin never gives Obi-Wan enough details to realize there's a problem beyond homesickness
• Anakin immediately follows up with "I'd rather dream about Padme"
• When Anakin tells Yoda about his visions of the woman whose husband he is, he gives Yoda no actionable information like "I see Senator Amidala dying" or "I see this person dying in childbirth"
• If someone tells you, "I foresee someone close to me dying , but I won't tell you who, when, where, how, or why," what the fuck are you supposed to tell them?

None of the rest is plot-relevant. (Also, Labyrinth of Evil is non-canon, unlike the comics I referenced)

 

[Valmond]

Like, the whole fucking point about episode 6 was that there was good left in Vader, and Luke could pull it out because Vader was still attached to his children.
Attachments were what saved (kinda, sorta, in a way, if you squint a bit) Anakin from the dark side.
Now imagine a world where Anakin was not forced to leave his mother, was provided therapy and emmotional support, and had the Jedi listen when he spoke about his visions.

Like, i get the argument that Jedi can't go on a crusade to free all the slaves everywhere all the time.
But that does not mean they can't free this one, right here, right now.