Star Wars III: A Philosophical Caveat (rant) and (mini) Review
I know, I know . . . we don’t need another Episode III review. But don’t worry—this is not a review. Enough things have been said about this movie by enough people, and I have nothing really to add to the discussion of the movie as a movie. All I want to do is point out something that Lucas tries to do with this film, philosophically, that just cannot be done.
But before I get to that, I can’t resist going back on my word (a little) and sneaking in a (mini) review. I thought that Episode III was very satisfying, both as a stand-alone movie and as the final Star Wars movie—it fit all the pieces into place, it delivered breathtaking action, it told a good story, it drummed up nostalgia, and it did all of this while maintaining that Star Wars feel. Like many others, I have fond memories of seeing The Empire Strikes Back, my first SW experience, and Episode III, for me, brought things full circle as it was supposed to. And, just as a final SW dork/fan-boy note to this (mini) review, I gotta say that the part where Yoda comes in and force brushes the Imperial Guards aside was so sweet. Even sweeter than seeing Chewbacca. Maybe even sweeter than that final shot of baby Luke on Tatooine, mimicking that first shot of teenage Luke in A New Hope—all of which was pretty sweet.
Now for the real point. Star Wars has always, in some circles, been talked about for its supposed smuggling of religious/philosophical ideas into its story and dialogue. The Force, for example, has at various times been seen as advocacy of some kind of pantheism, or Taoism, or new age beliefs, etc. Then, when the idea of the midi-chlorians was introduced, the Force was demystified and made more scientific—perhaps evolutionary. Episode III continues this tradition of Star Wars movies being about more than just light sabers and Ewoks.
But in this particular movie, more than in any of the others, I think a clear contradiction can be seen within what appears to be one of Lucas’ pet beliefs—relativism. If you go back and watch the older movies, hints of relativism can be found all around. Luke is once told (in Return of the Jedi) that truth depends on a person’s point-of-view. Numerous characters are repeatedly reminded to trust their feelings, their hearts. Now, some of this makes sense and is healthy, but the problem comes when relativism is posited absolutely. It’s an oxymoron, I know . . . but that’s the point.
In Episode III, when Anakin is ranting to Obi-Wan in preparation for their climactic fight, Obi-Wan comments that “only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes.� Everything, in other words, is relative. There is no absolute truth. It all depends on your point-of-view. Your feelings. Your heart. But then, not ten minutes later, when Anakin says that the Jedi are evil from his point-of-view, Obi-Wan responds with, “Well, then you are lost.� He doesn’t say, “Oh, okay—all truth is relative.� He doesn’t say, “Well, your opinion is as good as mine.� He doesn’t say, “No absolutes!� No. He instead affirms that some opinions are false, and that some false opinions can even cause a person to be “lost.� Well, the obvious question is: which way does Star Wars want it? Is there absolute truth, or not? Does all truth depend on point-of-view, or can I be “lost� if my point-of-view happens to be incorrect? Colloquially speaking, Lucas can’t have his cake and eat it too.
My personal opinion is that deep down, underneath the posturing, Lucas and whoever else is responsible for these bits of philosophizing knows that some things are really true, and some things are really false. As much as opinions and points-of-view matter, there is still good and evil, there are still heroes and villains, there is still the light and the dark side of the Force. Anakin still needs redeeming and the Emperor still needs to get his. This is just the way it is. The person who says, “There is no absolute truth,� is making an absolute truth claim. This is just the way it is. The person who says, “Everything is relative,� is supposedly saying something that isn’t relative. Relativism doesn’t work. This is just the way it is.
In the end, this all matters for a few reasons. First, a disturbing number of people, according to various surveys, agrees with the idea that there is no absolute truth. Second, this popular belief has become popular partly because of the influence of movies, music, etc.—culture in general. Star Wars, obviously, is a very weighty part of pop culture. Finally, pure relativism is spiritually dangerous. From a Christian viewpoint, there are some things that are non-negotiably true, and some that are non-negotiably false. From a Christian viewpoint, it is vitally important that people put their trust in the truth of the gospel. Popular relativism, of course, does not help this situation.
So, that’s my rant. Relativism just can’t be true. It doesn’t work philosophically, it doesn’t work practically, and as Episode III makes clear, it doesn’t work artistically. If “only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes,� then we’re all Sith Lords, even if we don’t know it. This is just the way it is.
But before I get to that, I can’t resist going back on my word (a little) and sneaking in a (mini) review. I thought that Episode III was very satisfying, both as a stand-alone movie and as the final Star Wars movie—it fit all the pieces into place, it delivered breathtaking action, it told a good story, it drummed up nostalgia, and it did all of this while maintaining that Star Wars feel. Like many others, I have fond memories of seeing The Empire Strikes Back, my first SW experience, and Episode III, for me, brought things full circle as it was supposed to. And, just as a final SW dork/fan-boy note to this (mini) review, I gotta say that the part where Yoda comes in and force brushes the Imperial Guards aside was so sweet. Even sweeter than seeing Chewbacca. Maybe even sweeter than that final shot of baby Luke on Tatooine, mimicking that first shot of teenage Luke in A New Hope—all of which was pretty sweet.
Now for the real point. Star Wars has always, in some circles, been talked about for its supposed smuggling of religious/philosophical ideas into its story and dialogue. The Force, for example, has at various times been seen as advocacy of some kind of pantheism, or Taoism, or new age beliefs, etc. Then, when the idea of the midi-chlorians was introduced, the Force was demystified and made more scientific—perhaps evolutionary. Episode III continues this tradition of Star Wars movies being about more than just light sabers and Ewoks.
But in this particular movie, more than in any of the others, I think a clear contradiction can be seen within what appears to be one of Lucas’ pet beliefs—relativism. If you go back and watch the older movies, hints of relativism can be found all around. Luke is once told (in Return of the Jedi) that truth depends on a person’s point-of-view. Numerous characters are repeatedly reminded to trust their feelings, their hearts. Now, some of this makes sense and is healthy, but the problem comes when relativism is posited absolutely. It’s an oxymoron, I know . . . but that’s the point.
In Episode III, when Anakin is ranting to Obi-Wan in preparation for their climactic fight, Obi-Wan comments that “only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes.� Everything, in other words, is relative. There is no absolute truth. It all depends on your point-of-view. Your feelings. Your heart. But then, not ten minutes later, when Anakin says that the Jedi are evil from his point-of-view, Obi-Wan responds with, “Well, then you are lost.� He doesn’t say, “Oh, okay—all truth is relative.� He doesn’t say, “Well, your opinion is as good as mine.� He doesn’t say, “No absolutes!� No. He instead affirms that some opinions are false, and that some false opinions can even cause a person to be “lost.� Well, the obvious question is: which way does Star Wars want it? Is there absolute truth, or not? Does all truth depend on point-of-view, or can I be “lost� if my point-of-view happens to be incorrect? Colloquially speaking, Lucas can’t have his cake and eat it too.
My personal opinion is that deep down, underneath the posturing, Lucas and whoever else is responsible for these bits of philosophizing knows that some things are really true, and some things are really false. As much as opinions and points-of-view matter, there is still good and evil, there are still heroes and villains, there is still the light and the dark side of the Force. Anakin still needs redeeming and the Emperor still needs to get his. This is just the way it is. The person who says, “There is no absolute truth,� is making an absolute truth claim. This is just the way it is. The person who says, “Everything is relative,� is supposedly saying something that isn’t relative. Relativism doesn’t work. This is just the way it is.
In the end, this all matters for a few reasons. First, a disturbing number of people, according to various surveys, agrees with the idea that there is no absolute truth. Second, this popular belief has become popular partly because of the influence of movies, music, etc.—culture in general. Star Wars, obviously, is a very weighty part of pop culture. Finally, pure relativism is spiritually dangerous. From a Christian viewpoint, there are some things that are non-negotiably true, and some that are non-negotiably false. From a Christian viewpoint, it is vitally important that people put their trust in the truth of the gospel. Popular relativism, of course, does not help this situation.
So, that’s my rant. Relativism just can’t be true. It doesn’t work philosophically, it doesn’t work practically, and as Episode III makes clear, it doesn’t work artistically. If “only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes,� then we’re all Sith Lords, even if we don’t know it. This is just the way it is.
20 Comments:
I, CJ, am a born-again Christain and have been all my life. Star Wars, to me, has given loads of spiritual insight to me. Have you not noticed the over-done allegory throughout the whole series? Obi-wan claims that "only a Sith Lord deals in absolute" probably due to the fact that Sith crave absolute power, in which they will not let anyone have or get in the way of. The Jedi, which to me have been symbolic of a cross between Buddhists and Christians, seek the knowledge and truth of the Force and are willing to share with anyone who seeks it. Therefore the Jedi are not absolute. They are willing to share the light with all who seek it, unlike the Sith. Another point, the Sith seek power to rise above everyone else and gain absolute power. The Jedi seek to be guided by the Force and do it's will, not rise above it.
Thirdly and lastly, Anakin betrayed his Masdter and closest friend. If I remember what it's like to feel betrayed, most of the time I respond very ackwardly and harsh. When dealing with backstabbing, no one really ever reacts calmly and smoothly. Let's face it: Obi-Wan was frustrated, confused and hurt that his apprentice betrayed him. The Jedi see the dark side as absolute evil, so for Obi-Wan's statement, it would have to be out of emotion, not reasoning. Or else he's contradicting the whole Jedi mandate, which I highly doubt he'd do on purpose. Then again, when one feels betrayed by something they've believed all their lives, their perceptions do get muddled. Maybe that's one of the hidden reasons Obi-Wan went into exile for so long.
Hey CJ,
Your comments are very interesting. I think we're coming at it from two points of view (fittingly :) )--I'm seeing the dialogue as Lucas' words in his characters' mouths, and you're seeing the dialogue as what those characters would actually say, given their personalities and the situation. Admittedly, I hadn't thought of it like that. I suppose it is possible that Obi-Wan misspeaks, based on the emotion of Anakin's betrayal, etc.
Still, at some level the characters' words are Lucas' words. And the fact is that he does, within one scene, have his characters affirming and negating relativism (or affirming and negating the existence of absolute truth). So I just wanted to focus on that phenomenon and basically say that he can't have it both ways, and that relativism doesn't work. Your take on it, though, is really interesting. Maybe a lesson for me to not deconstruct so much, and to sometimes take characters (as characters) at their word.
Two final things: First, I agree that SW is spiritually insightful, and maybe even allegorical. But, then, I think most stories have traces of spiritual truth (check out my other reviews, esp Kung Fu Hustle, for thoughts on this). Second, I'm not sure about drawing some kind of allegorical line between the Jedi and, say, the church. I mean, do the Jedi really seek to share the "truth of the Force" with everyone? At some level, to me, they seem awfully cloistered in their tower, choosing (as they did with Anakin) who gets to be a part of their circle. Something to consider . . . but I definitely like your point about the Jedi following the Force and the Sith using it as a means to power. There's definitely something there.
Star Wars is written for a mass audience. This is not meant to affirm spirituality, however, it's broad aim allows for narrow filtering. You can find whatever you want in it and take whatever you want from it. I found Star Wars III an insightful look into the fall of spiritually powerful. My comments can be found here.
Hey uncle Matt i understand what you wrote about in your review. I found it quite interesting. Do you think Lucas did a good job on this film?
gaddabout: Yeah, the way that many different people can make many different connections to a story is one of the great things about them. Your thoughts on spiritual leaders, etc., were very insightful. I chose to see the issue of relativism behind Lucas' words. CJ chose to focus on the believability of character dialogue as character dialogue. You're choosing to focus on the dynamic changes that can happen to powerful people--all great stuff.
PJ . . . what's up, nephew. Thanks for coming to read my stuff--that's very cool of you. Do I think Lucas did a good job? Absolutely. I thought Ep.III was excellent. Actually, I think it rivals even the old trilogy. Now . . . um . . . do your homework and eat your vegetables! Oh, and stop stealing my old records! :)
As a Catholic Christian, I saw Yoda's revelation about Qui-Gon Jinn returning from the netherworld and offering to show Obi-Wan how to get in touch with him as being CRUCIAL to the redemption of Anakin. The Catholic Church teaches that, through the power of the Holy Spirit, there are two Churches that are both the Body of Christ. The Church Militant is the Jedi in the material realm (the Saints on Earth). The Church Triumphant is the Jedi such as Qui-Gon who have passed [with the Victory Jesus Christ won for them] into the Spiritual Realm (the Saints in Heaven). The Church teaches that the Saints in Heaven are primarily concerned with two things - Worshiping God in total freedom of Spirit and Truth, and INTERCEEDING for those still on Earth.
Hint: Qui-Gon and Yoda and Obi-Wan, through the Living Force (the Holy Spirit) conspire to help Anakin [entombed as Darth Vader] go deep undercover into the darkness to destroy the Power of the Sith for good! Remember that Senator Palpatine is a man created in the Image and Likeness of God as well. HE needs redemption as well [just like Hitler, Stalin and Saddam Hussein and his sons]. PRAY FOR YOUR ENEMIES!!!
DJ D2
p.s. Remember that Chewbacca is Jesus, the Wookies are the Israelities, Boba Fete is on a convoluted mission to bring redemption to Han Solo, and in Episode III Chewie is seen (briefly) at the LEFT hand of God the Father....nuf said?
CJ, here again. I'm just writing that in terms of the denomination split, Christianity does deal in relativism. The different denominations believe that one specific form of worship or prayer is the way to God while the others don't. So to them it's the truth, despite the fact that, say a Anglican, Catholic, etc. might disagree on. But they all believe in the same God and savior, so in relativity they may disagree on things, but it all leads to Jesus. The original Catholic Church doctrine taught of purgatory(I'm not sure if they still do). While Protestants may totally disagree, to them it is the truth. It does not affect them in relation to the absolute truth of Jesus as savior. It's similar to Star Wars in terms of relativity. While, to some characters ways of truth and finding The Force are different, it all leads to the light side of the Force being the only answer.
And since you've given no response, I'll just assume that you either totally disagree or totally agree. Something tells me it's more the first than the latter.
I may not be a Pastor or a Priest, but I KNOW that Christianity does not completely deal with absolutes in terms of the denomination splits. I'm not being blasphemous, I'm just stating the truth.
Wow, Mr.Hill, the way you put it(about the whole contadictory thing and the relatism not bieng true) really makes me think, gosh. now im going to have to watch this movie about twelve more times so i understand all this crazy sub-text.
I guess ill just have to wax-intellectual with you one day. :)
your favorite student, (haha)
alex n.
I don't think he heard you. Maybe you should speak up.
I hear all (almost). :) But if you really want to talk to me, you'll have to do so in context of my new music reviews--they need readers! (Hi, Alex! Your techiness continues to impress me.)
And you know, since I'm here, I will respond quickly to the thing about denominationalism above. Sorry I didn't respond sooner, and whoever was posting that stuff may never see this, but . . . yes, Christianity has many denominations, many varying views on various aspects of the faith, but that doesn't mean that the *core truth* of Christianity is somehow relative. It just means that fallen people have varying interpretations of an unvariable, spiritual, objective, capital-T Truth (the gospel).
So, yeah. Just remember the main point of the review: Star Wars wants to have its cake and eat it too--wants to posit relativism in the context of a universe of absolutes. Can't be done.
I disagree with the above comments in regards to interpretations of the movie. When Obi Wan criticizes Anakin for "dealing with absolutes", he is referring specifically to Anakin's comment that you either have to be ALL for him, or ENTIRELY against him. Not regarding that you could be for the good things in him but opposed to the evil in him. The later statement of Anakin saying that the Jedi are evil from his "point of view" and Obi Wan saying that he is lost, deals with absolute truth, and that in this case the "point of view" does not apply. Some things are more absolute than others. The core doctrines of the bible are absolute. Other things are not. We are to be led by the Holy Spirit every day for that reason. The Apostle Paul in deals with some of these issues as to whether to celebrate holy days or to not care about what day is what, meat previously sacrificed to idols and now sold on the market, and such. The CONTEXT of the statements is important. In the first one before the duel, we are dealing with our view of people, in the second one, hovering over the lava river on those lil droids with heat shields, it is dealing with greater things, core doctrines.
Jim--
Good distinction, and I think you're right. I just wanted to make the connection that in *all* the Star Wars movies, there is a leaning towards relativism--I think this is clear. I also think it's clear, that because of the nature of storytelling, Lucas can never perfectly hold to the relativism he wants to include in his tales. Someone has to be right, and someone has to be wrong for his stories (I'd say any stories) to work, and for that reason, his pop-philosophy ends up refuting itself. So, certainly we have to interpret everything in context, and your examples via the Bible are spot on, but I hope that the overall point still stands.
I am wondering what makes you think that Lucas WANTS to be relatavistic in his movies? What evidence have you of that? Or is this just an assumption on your part? SOME core things are absolute, core doctrines and values, other things are relative. Star Wars reflects that as a mirror of our world. Some things are core values of good and bad, light and dark. Other things are not so clear cut. Darth Vader would not have been in a position to kill Palpatine in Jedi if he had not become dark to suddenly turn on him. If Vader had merely pretended to be evil, the Emperor would have detected that and killed him for the treachery. In scripture evil is turned to be used against itself by the Lord Himself as he works all things out. This isn't relativism, but it is turning evil against itself. The Lord foreknew that Judas was going to betray him but deliberately allowed events to play out so his plan to be crucified for us would go on. Judas was judged for the evil in his heart by his own choices, but the Lord sovereignly allowed events to play into His plans. Satan himself no doubt inspired people to crucify the Lord. It was only in the end that he probably realized that he had only defeated himself. The Jedi I believe compromised with core truth or what was best in the waning days of the Republic. They added things to the original Jedi code and requirements on the Jedi, including forced celibacy or if not that at least falling in love was forbidden. In the novels and backstory when Luke becomes the new headmaster of the Order familial attachments and attachments with friends are no longer forbidden. Some force powers before seen as part of the dark side period, that doctrine is also questioned, such as force choke or lightening. I would say it is the evil in the heart that counts more than the manifestations of power. If someone drops dead of a curse we often call that a demonic power, and often it would be, if it works. However in a few cases in the bible God was so angry that he caused some people to just drop dead. Again we have to be careful that just because of the one line about "Only a Sith deals in absolutes" is dealing with PEOPLE, not DOCTRINES, and therefore does not mean Lucas is trying to be relativistic. The "point of view" statements in other lines in the movie are dealing with situations and not doctrines. Many things he HOLD to be true do depend on our point of view. ONLY core doctrines and also definitive and provable facts about the world are there or not there, regardless of our point of view. Some situations are more complex however. Indeed, you can as Paul says, regard some days as holy, observe them, and be blessed for it, or you can regard all days the same, just seek God, and be blessed for it. As scripture on this, I don't like that some fundamentalists criticize some churches as being evil for even observing holy days. However they are correct in criticizing some churches for making people think they are sinning for choosing not to observe a holy day. In Star Wars one is lost if he is a Sith (therefore know better), but thinks the Jedi are evil, however one may disagree with some side dogmas of the Jedi and wish for reform. In the Clone War cartoon, part two, Anakin and Padme discuss a desire for the reform after the war with the Jedi prohibition against marriage.
Some have interpreted the gospels as saying that Judas repented, it is possible. At the time he betrayed Jesus however, he was thoroughly corrupt. I think it is more likely that Lucas wanted us to think about which issues are absolute and which ones are not. Perhaps many of the statements in the movies are working through that rather than preaching at. We as Christians have to be careful of who is saying what in a movie, and also the same goes for the bible. Satan himself is quoted in some passages in the bible, and we certainly don't want to take those for being good doctrine.
Jim:
It's clear that you have some bone to pick here, and if you're a Star Wars fan, that's cool . . so am I, though apparently not as big a one as you (which is okay). But please make sure you understand that I'm not dissing on Star Wars as a great story, or Lucas as a director/storyteller. I'm simply making the point, as a Christian, brother, that Star Wars does what lots of modern stories do, and that is to include a blend of philosophies that don't really fit together. Let me here copy the relevant part of the original review:
[begin quote]
Now for the real point. Star Wars has always, in some circles, been talked about for its supposed smuggling of religious/philosophical ideas into its story and dialogue. The Force, for example, has at various times been seen as advocacy of some kind of pantheism, or Taoism, or new age beliefs, etc. Then, when the idea of the midi-chlorians was introduced, the Force was demystified and made more scientific—perhaps evolutionary. Episode III continues this tradition of Star Wars movies being about more than just light sabers and Ewoks.
But in this particular movie, more than in any of the others, I think a clear contradiction can be seen within what appears to be one of Lucas’ pet beliefs—relativism. If you go back and watch the older movies, hints of relativism can be found all around. Luke is once told (in Return of the Jedi) that truth depends on a person’s point-of-view. Numerous characters are repeatedly reminded to trust their feelings, their hearts. Now, some of this makes sense and is healthy, but the problem comes when relativism is posited absolutely. It’s an oxymoron, I know . . . but that’s the point.
In Episode III, when Anakin is ranting to Obi-Wan in preparation for their climactic fight, Obi-Wan comments that “only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes.� Everything, in other words, is relative. There is no absolute truth. It all depends on your point-of-view. Your feelings. Your heart. But then, not ten minutes later, when Anakin says that the Jedi are evil from his point-of-view, Obi-Wan responds with, “Well, then you are lost.� He doesn’t say, “Oh, okay—all truth is relative.� He doesn’t say, “Well, your opinion is as good as mine.� He doesn’t say, “No absolutes!� No. He instead affirms that some opinions are false, and that some false opinions can even cause a person to be “lost.� Well, the obvious question is: which way does Star Wars want it? Is there absolute truth, or not? Does all truth depend on point-of-view, or can I be “lost� if my point-of-view happens to be incorrect? Colloquially speaking, Lucas can’t have his cake and eat it too.
[end quote]
I still think, even given your already-agreed upon distinction involving context, etc., that the above point stands. Friend, when a series wants to say "truth depends on point of view," or "trust your heart"--which it does say, and which statements, regardless of context, can be extrapolated to represent a general philosophy or tone, which *many* people before me have noted in regards to this series--that is at least a hinting at relativism. But, on the other hand, the series obviously needs to emphasize or at least hint at absolutes as well. Again, the point stands.
Now, if you still disagree, that's fine, but let's not keep this up. And please stop bringing the Bible in as some kind of counter-example. I already agreed with your idea that some things are absolute and some aren't--that's clear. I'm just saying, that in the case of Star Wars, that there *is* a little bit of wanting to have it both ways. The end result of that argument, please don't miss, is that there *is* absolute truth--which is an important point for this "day and age" to hear. And, brother, like you, the absolute absolute of this is the gospel.
Thanks again for the input.
I brought the bible in as a counterpoint to show how in some things how God judges does depend on how we see things. There is one scripture that says that even if somethig isn't a sin, but you think it is, and you do it anyway, you are sinning. The wise person therefore learns truth so that he avoids what God says is sin but has greater freedom in his life. I am still not so sure about your interpretations of Star Wars. My interpretation is that Star Wars says SOME things depend on how we see things, but some things are absolute. Nowhere does Star Wars say that the genocide committed by Palpatine and Vader is good. It does hint at the redemptive value of suffering at times, but nowhere does it say hearts of those that engineer such things are good.
And relying on your feelings and heart, even there in Star Wars, it depends. If you are guided by the light, then you are doing well, if you are guided by darkness, then you are in trouble. The heart can be led by the Holy Spirit or by dark powers. Since we are not perfect at that, we need God's Word. As a parellel, the Jedi don't just feel feel feel, they also study and contemplate. They use their minds as well. I don't like churches that have zero emphasize on being led by or experiencing the Holy Spirit and rely on cold logic alone. With issues I would consider to be core values, nowhere is Star Wars relative. It is people who are more complex. When Anakin slaughters the Sandpeople, it isn't the fact that we kills them that is an issue as much as the REVENGE and HATRED in is heart. The Sandpeople are not very sympathetic. Their redemption it not impossible. Interesting that Attack of the Clones casts a negative light on Anakin's slaughter of the Sandpeople. I think it is saying something about his state of heart, and perhaps hinting that they should be given a chance for redemption. Also even to fight them only when needed, but not to commit genocide against them. At the end of the enhanced Return of the Jedi, a stormtrooper is crowd surfing during the celebrations in the streets, and he seems to be very happy. He enjoys the new state of freedom and his new life.
As for Obi Wan's comment to Luke when Luke confronts him about not telling him Vader is his father. In this case the point of view IS partially important. Spiritually speaking Vader DID murder Anakin. In the bible when Satan fell, he was given a new name. Abraham was given a new name from Abram to Abraham as he followed the Lord. The bible says that when we come to Christ, the old man is dead and a new one lives in us. Every specific case in Star Wars where there seems to be a relativistic message, the situation would not be black or white scripturally speaking. I do think Obi Wan and Yoda erred in hiding from Luke that Vader was his father. They feared that if he knew he would try too hard to redeem Vader, be killed, and then all would be lost. They did know it was difficult for a Sith to come back, but some did besides Vader in the past. Obi Wan and Yoda had concerns over revealing to Luke that Vader was his father, but in the end it was good that he found out because it led to Vader's redemption. In situations in Star Wars that are black and white, Star Wars makes distinctions between right and wrong.
In Revenge of the Sith when Anakin and the Clones march into the Jedi temple to slaughter the Jedi, there is a few second top down camera shot where a design on the floor looks like a cross with crisscrossing hallways. The design isn't actually a cross but the camera angle is meant to make the audience think of the cross, as in Anakin and the Clones are now trampling on the cross to go and kill the Jedi. This is a right/wrong light/dark issue, not relativism.
Post a Comment
<< Home