I always thought of Star Wars more close to an eastern point of view of morality. One in which one creates his own hell, where the faults of the past materialize as chains of the souls not because of supernatural justice but as a consequence to making violece towards one's human nature. Even the light/dark dicotomy is closer to a buddhist interpretation, where a sith basically enters a spiral of egocentrism and self-perpetuating motion feeding in his violent urges and a jedi controls these urges. It makes sense that, if we follow an eastern take on morality, in Jedi Anakin redeems himself. In Bushido, the warrior is his only judge. His greater sense of honour and zen watch upon his actions constantly and he feels the weight of every misdeed.
This is how I see it. And I saw the light/dark nature of the Force as being inspired by Taoist concepts of dualism, where the two halves are a single whole, inseparable from one another. Yoda's attitude suggests this, and Obi Wan's comment to Anakin makes a lot of sense from that perspective. The concept of balance is important to 'good' Jedi, whereas the Sith do not or cannot accept it. The series doesn't do a perfect job of adhering to this, of course. It's often drawing on inspirations it doesn't fully understand. But this is the core of the jedi in Star Wars at its best, imo.
Minor nitpick: Immaculate Conception does not refer to Jesus being conceived without intercourse, but to Mary being conceived without sin (at 8:00-8:10).
In retrospect, I find the prequel's references to moral relativism interesting, because as far as I remember, Vader and the Emperor never try to deny being evil or embracing the dark side in the original movies. They don't seem concerned with good and evil at all. They aren't fighting the rebels because they think the rebels are evil, they're fighting them because they are an obstacle to power. Power over the Force and the universe is what the Sith are about, whereas classic Yoda seemed to preach a philosophy of accepting the universe as it was. When jedi are on the edge of falling to the dark side, it's usually because they reject this in order to exercise personal power, even if it's for a good cause, like Luke trying to kill the emperor.
thats actually really cool, because c3p0 and r2 get their "memory disks" or whatever wiped at the end of episode III so c3p0 picked up the habit of thanking the maker back when he knew who it was (anakin) but for episodes IV onward he has no idea who he is thanking (darth vader).
Thank you so much for the video-essays you are creating here. Since I dicovered your channel I´m totaly in awe about the high standard of your content. A lot of what you are saying gives me to think. About the art of film and the different topics you bring up aswell. I´m looking forward to what´s coming next.
I think that the prequel trilogy is an allegory for the fall of heaven. Think about it, Anakin is Lucifer, Obi Wan is Michael, Yoda is God, Sidious is the Darkness. The fight between Anakin and Obi Wan ends in Anakin burning in a figurative hell. The fight between Yoda and Sidious is a representation of the battle of good and evil, and evil won.
+Nero Wayne (Wyvern Dracul) Yes and No, it's more of a speculation and interpretation thing. There are some evidence that suggests the darkness in revaluation 6:12. "I looked when He broke the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth made of hair, and the whole moon became like blood;" Supernatural only interprets this into a literal force. The way I interpreted it was an opposite to God. The darkness to me is something that defines seduction, you look into the darkness and though you fear it, curiosity gets the better. Intrigued it sends you literally and figuratively into darkness. God is the opposite, God is the light in the dark that gives comfort, ancient and stern powerful but gentle. Seem familiar?
+Nero Wayne (Wyvern Dracul) You can ague in the book of Genesis verse here too. "Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness."
A nice discussion of the Star Wars in the context of mythos, morality and religious concepts. Film subtext can often be as interesting (or more so) than the surface.
Fantastic video! I was always bugged by the simplicity of the "dark & light" philosophy presented in Star Wars, but this makes me think I've been to hard on it. Either way, it was a great look at spirituality and morality through the lense of some fantastic movies.
I really wish that Lucas had had someone to help with his script for the prequels because just a few lines could have made a big difference. On midichlorians alone, the explanation could have been so simple: they are a harmless, microscopic life form attracted to the Force, and testing their numbers in blood is one of the ways to use science/technology to measure Force strength in a person. Midichlorians don't create the Force, they just congregate in large numbers wherever it's present.
I took midiclorians as symbiotic organisms they don’t create the force but live in beings that have the force. The stronger the connection to the force the larger the number of midiclorians. Counting the midiclorians is a easy way to determine a persons power.
What i never understood was that in episode 4 the guy says that the force is a "Ancient religion" but 30 years ago the Jedi were everywhere in the galaxy. If the catholic church disbanded people wouldn't consider it ancient after 30 years.
+MrThedorkknight Ancient only means old. For example: In ancient Rome, the Romans generally left the Jews alone because they considered Judaism to be an ancient religion. They had no problem shunning the Christians because they saw it as new (even if Christians, both Gentile ones and Jewish ones didn't see themselves in that fashion).
Yeah things turn into myths really quickly in star wars but then it's a big galaxy right now anyone of us could easily face time someone in isreal but when it took years for Christianity to come to this country i guess it's like that
I'm sorry but what you mean is the Incarnation of Christ: the Immaculate Conception is the birth of the Virgin Mary by natural means of two parents but her soul was kept from the original sin of the fall of Adam and Eve: I'm into theology: this something many get mixed up : I hope not being Insulting : I do enjoy your show
C3PO in Attack of the clones, sees Anikan for the first time and years and proclaims "The Maker!" Indicating that The Maker is the one who built the droid.
***** True, and for an analysis of the movies alone or the current canon universe, it makes sense to exclude it. Personally, I find it limiting to be restricted to the movies alone when there's so many stories and ideas in the EU that have only recently been decanonized and have yet to be overwritten by new material. I also find it frustrating that Disney corporate can step in and decide what stories are important and meaningful and worthy of discussion, and which can be discarded as irrelevant on the basis of canon... but until I can scrounge up $4 billion to buy Star Wars, I guess that's their call and not mine XD
+Marcus Williams Lucas, despite the criticism he gets, he actually, despite saying the Expanded Universe in his eyes were an expansion and only considered the six movies his headcanon in numerous interviews, did try to save the EU according to various reports, by making the next Star Wars movies to take place 100-200 Years after Return of the Jedi, therefore the EU would live on and Disney gets to create a blank slate and add their own twist to Star Wars with the EU still being canon. But Disney threw his story treatments in the trash because, 'Refusal to pay royalty fees'
Huh, now I'm curious to see what his treatments would have been... though I imagine Disney also wanted to bank on bringing back the classic trilogy actors and characters, since that seems like what audiences at large are more interesting. While I have a lot of issues with what Lucas did with Star Wars in the prequels and the Clone Wars cartoon, I do have to give him credit for giving the EU a lot of breathing room, and even for allowing it to exist and expand so much in the first place.
Yeah, that too, Gallifreyan Jedi also reported in his blog video 'Revisiting Disney's Invalidation of the Star Wars EU' that they're considering bring back EU Characters, just giving them different names so to not pay royalty fees, such as Mara Jade.
+Neo-Reality Entertainment I'd heard about the possibility of bringing Mara Jade back in Star Wars Rebels (mixed feelings about that), but with a different name. Didn't know about the royalty fees, though... I'd figured because Timothy Zahn wrote the books for Lucasfilm under their Star Wars brand, all the characters therein would become property of Lucasfilm. Hmm... it would suck to have to not be able to refer to Mara Jade as Mara Jade, but if they at least brought her look and personality back, I'd probably still enjoy the character well enough.
I always figured midichlorians were just an easy way for the Jedi to identify new recruits. Unlike sensing the force, a count of little critters in a being can be done by machines.
Small note: "immaculate conception" does not refer to the virgin birth of Jesus, it refers to *Mary's being born without sin.* Jesus's birth is an "incarnation." This is a common mistake, though, and doesn't take much away from your thoughtful analysis.
One problem I had with this video is the assertion that morals based of a creator based world is disproven. i can only speak from one view on creator based morality but according most creator based morals, these morals are not arbitrary as Leon insists that they would be, they exist to sere the purpose of whatever helps life or glorifies the creator. Nor would said morals be something that existed before the creator, he invented them to serve his purpose.
I've always seen the Force as less of an abstract Good/Evil and more as a 'great power brings great responsability' thing. The Force grants you power to accomplish the things you want, and it's up to you to use it with compassion, order and knowledge to do what is best to everyone, and would lean towards democracy, or to use it with hate, selfishness and greed to fullfill your own disires, rule over everyone else and people will inevitably be turning on each other. That's Light and Dark for me, and sometimes maybe a balance is needed as neither the iron-fist empire and backstbing sith, or the corrupt republic and foolish jedi were perfect. Or maybe I'm just an indecisive forever neutral person. Anyway, the force will be with us all, always.
TheRezro If there is one thing good about the removal of the EU from canon is that we can just pick what is truly good and forget remaing. Yay for head-canon.
One possible interpretation of the force is that it's something like the Tao and that by taking things to the extreme both Jedi and Sith became corrupted and this ultimately led to the consequences we see in the film
Light and Dark duality in Star Wars seems to be either the moral absolutism found in most monotheistic religions or balance of forces found in eastern philosophies. It interesting how the Sith would think of the Jeti as evil. When I look at the light side of the force it seems more towards (Apollonian, collectivism, and Order). The Dark side of the force is more (Dionysian, individualism, and Chaos). One interesting theory is Darth Vader was bringing the balance but he had to bring it on both sides. Both sides had their idea on what is balance. The Jeti seem to want harmony the Sith want revenge. And at the end they both got what they want. The story of Good and Evil go back but so does chaos and order. But in the second one they play their role in the universe. But neither should have the upper-hand. George Lucas's "thx 1138" shows a world that seems very much on the side of order and it not a great place to be in as it is devoid of emotion and autonomy. This idea of balance can be found in many fictions, the Michael Moorcock's Multiverse, Lego Universe, Demolition man, Werewolf the Apocalypse, Mage the Ascension, Ultima VII serpent isle and plenty more. The interesting thing about logic and emotions in morals is they are both complex. A lot of people may think logic is better at morals over emotions. But emotions are what help us feel compassion and justice and other virtues. Yes there are emotions that push us to vice. In addition also to much emotions with little rational and composer to control them can lead to rash decisions that are also destructive. Yoda Talking about fear seem paradoxical. Yes it can lead to irrational emotions that lead to suffering but they also fear training Skywalker. Fear is that warning of some danger so is it always irrational? Lets say you run into a Lion. It seems rational to be scared, but if you can collect yourself you may come up with a better tactic to survive. But if you get into panic (fight or flight) you are mostly going to get killed. People with next to no emotions treat other people like furniture so I am not sure I would say emotions are bad. Also there is a conditions known as Alexithymia that give people a lack of emotional stimuli, meaning the they will also lack empathy, intuition, and imagination.
Well, slavery is illegal in the Republic, but Tatooine is in Hutt space. The Jedi can't legally supercede that. Which is stated in the movie, if I remember correctly.
Anakin does redeem himself in the end because Star Wars has a very eastern ethos, I'll elaborate. He created his own hell out of attachment. It started with killing his wife, breaking his body, and warring with his kids. If he dies from this attachment, he'll forever be separated from his son, himself, and the whole galaxy. No force ghosting. But he was able to let go of unhealthy attachment in order to focus on the Right attachments, especially toward his family.
+Renegade Cut It's alright. I honestly expect it. It's pertinent, topical, and I have to say, you did touch on various topics that most of the other videos and articles I've seen haven't. So it was a bit of a new perspective. Kudos to you for that (I stole the Kudos from Linkara. He won't miss them. He gives them out like candy, anyway).
I always thought Han’s line about hell was no more indicative of there being an actual hell in Star Wars than the word “rendezvous” is proof that the French exist in Star Wars. To me it’s more like the audience has a babelfish
I don't think that a jedi being able to appear as a spirit necessarily suggests a western style after-life, let alone that spirit being in Heaven. It may tell us they have a soul, but it says nothing about where that soul resides after death. Given how much the original films owe to eastern philosophy, it could just as easily suggest that spirits are a part of the human world, a la Shinto and other animist traditions. The Force itself kind of already implies this. Anakin appearing after death only tells us he is a dead force user, not whether he was redeemed in the eyes of a creator god who may or may not exist.
I have to disagree with the statement that "one the most constant features of hell is that it is eternal". Western Christianity believes in it (although it is becoming less and less popular, in Europe at-least), but Eastern Christianity for the most part does not (leading to Origin's infamous statement that even Satan will one day be saved from Hell). In Islam it is a hotly debated issue which mostly comes down to how you interpret certain Arabic words. Judaism has no strong consensus on the after-life in general and it doesn't on this sub-topic either. Dharmic religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, etc.) explicitly does not have an eternal hell (the different level of horribleness of different hells are often expressed by how long a life in one of them lasts, but none of them are eternal). Sikhism also believes in a temporary heaven and hell followed by rebirth. The same with Chinese religions. And Zoroastrianism believes that hell will only last until Ahuramazda wins over Angra Mainyu and destroys ontological evil; at which point the souls in Hell will be freed and evil and suffering will become metaphysically impossible.
*****: Fair enough. I still think the wording "more common" can be easily misleading or misunderstood though, as the concept of an eternal hell is far less common than the opposite (although precise numbers on this front are impossible to gather, especially if you are talking historically rather than contemporary).
I have to point out that eternal punishment in Hell is almost uniquely a Christian concept. The Muslims believe in almost identical Hell, but they believe that it is finite for most of its denizens, depending on the exact denomination -- according to some even the Devil will eventually be redeemed, even if it takes an incredibly long time. The Hells in Buddhist faith are likewise finite, transient states of being, just like everything else outside Nirvana. Even a good chunk of Christians have grown uncomfortable with the concept of everlasting punishment, and seek to reinterpret the Biblical passages alluding to such a possibility. The Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, believe that unbelievers will simply cease to be if they don't repent their ways; they don't suffer, they just die permanently.
***** And for all other Christians, as per the Bible, everybody gets the same final reward, no matter how late in life they repent. But that doesn't change the fact that in traditional Christianity Hell itself is considered an eternal punishment, although the Bible fails to directly describe one, instead just stating that those who act against God are going to suffer in unspecified manner.
Just a small nitpick, but it's basically only in Christianity that hell is considered eternal. Islamic sources are conflicted on the topic, but often citing the (much more sympathetic) idea that everyone will be forgiven at the end of days. In all the hell realms of the dharmic religions, punishment is long but not eternal (though it lasts for aeons in the worst of the hells, Avīci) - a concept of an eternal hell would severely clash with the central idea of saṃsāra in dharmic thought. The impermanence of all things is the root of suffering in saṃsāra, and only nirvāṇa, liberation from the cycle of suffering, can be eternal. So the idea of eternal hell in Christianity is not necessarily the norm among world religions, but rather a deviant and malevolent concept.
I think that midichlorians are still a reductionist way to express what it is the force, if the force is a spiritual entity, how is it possible that the force can be quatified?, I think that the force is a trascendental philosophy more than an animism, I think is more similar to neoplatonic mysticism (or very close to the augustinian positive theology) than the Spinoza's pantheism for example, so I still think that even though the force can interact with living and material things, his entity is sitll above those kinds of being, and cannot be measured through its interaction with them,
I like your analysis and agree with the overview. My point was more about being a kid and playing as a Jedi, doesn't the midrochlorian thing mean that you can never grow up to be a jedi? Or have I misunderstood? It just seems counter intuitive to create a great kids fantasy then yank it away in the sequels.
+Saintly Pants Except that Luke, both in the movies and the novels based on them, had no problem channeling the force through his artificial hand as it had become a part of his being.
So, in regard to the force and your analysis. where would the Yuuzhan Vong stand? They are extra-galactic species that are for the most part immune to the Force, unable to be sensed through it, swayed by the Jedi mind trick, or thrown through Force telekinesis. Ignoring the whole canonicity issue (because let's face it that whole "the expanded universe is no longer canon" thing is just complete bull), where would they stand in all this?
Fantasy is an interpretation or exploration of past real-world events in a safe fictional setting, so science-fantasy is a sub-genre that fits Star Wars like a glove. Religion is an important part of humanity's history, so why not explore it in a fanastical setting like Star Wars? Don't dismiss fantasy as just wizards and dragons, which (by the way) have their real-world allegories and weren't just created out of thin air to simply mark something as genre-fiction.
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes," says the guy who preached that Vader could never be saved because once you turn evil, you can never not be evil again. Actually, I want to add that an interesting aspect of these films that often gets overlooked, while the Force can be proved to exist in this universe because of the power it grants to people, the actual Jedi religion is at various times shown to be one that's not perfect. It has doctrines that prove false in the end. The notion mentioned above, that Vader could not be saved, is a religious one that the Jedi have applied to their understanding of the Force and that proves untrue. In the prequels (which, for the record, I am loathe to bring up), the Jedi council believes in a prophecy and they try to act on it, but in so doing end up creating Darth Vader through blind adherence to dogma when Anikin needed more careful, individual guidance. So, really, the Force is a thing that exists and the Jedi order is a religion built up around it, which, as a human endeavor, has its flaws. In that respect, the Star Wars films actually have some complex undertones to them which are not immediately apparent to casual viewing.
Midichlorians reduce the Force to a biological coincidence. In the prequels, access to the Force is nothing you can strive or have to work for anymore-it just became something you happen to have or not, depending how many symbiotic organisms lived inside your body. If you have more than 20,000 Midichlorians, you become a whiny young adult without personality and a highly questionable moral compass, and later Darth Vader. How engrossing and fascinating! Not. A lot of the rather spiritual/animistic mythology in the Star Wars universe got explained away or simply ignored and contradicted in the prequels. In that light it’s rather tragic and comical how soulless, flat and artificial the prequels feel in comparison to the first trilogy-a perfect match to the Midichlorian “explanation” of the force.
I'm surprised Chi did not come up. Or the Jedi/Jidai, Sith/Sikh naming trivia. But I can see a clear understanding of the force within Star Wars. There is no moral absolutism in my opinion, with there being the Force and a dark side to that force. I don't think a light side is ever mentioned. There is only the Force and its dark, taboo side. Kind of like countries having the right to self-defence and armies, but also weapons considered inhumane and things viewed as war crimes. So the Jedi are just the visible majority of the Force users deciding on which practices were allowed and which weren't. Also another interesting fact which people don't look into as much as they should... Jedi mind tricks. We know that the Jedi can use their jedi mind trick to alter someone's way of thinking. This is even considered okay and moral. So what if the force or specific force techniques alter the jedi's mind as well?
Agreed. Not only are they delivered in what can only be described as "the worst acting ever not done by Tommy Weiseau," they're so badly written. Nobody talks like that. Nobody in real life says, "From my point of view (anything)."
It's rather useless to analyze star wars in this fashion as it is utterly inconsistent and not very enlightening. George Lucas is no genius, he makes schlock and no amount of mental gymnastics will create depth where there is none...
There's another major difference between Anakin and Jesus: I'm pretty sure Jesus liked sand.
Eh just cause he lived around it doesn't necessarily mean he liked it.
Thank you!. Everyone gets hung up on the midichlorians. Very good explaination.
I always thought of Star Wars more close to an eastern point of view of morality. One in which one creates his own hell, where the faults of the past materialize as chains of the souls not because of supernatural justice but as a consequence to making violece towards one's human nature. Even the light/dark dicotomy is closer to a buddhist interpretation, where a sith basically enters a spiral of egocentrism and self-perpetuating motion feeding in his violent urges and a jedi controls these urges. It makes sense that, if we follow an eastern take on morality, in Jedi Anakin redeems himself. In Bushido, the warrior is his only judge. His greater sense of honour and zen watch upon his actions constantly and he feels the weight of every misdeed.
*****
"Enlightment". I think this term speaks for itself.
TheRezro I'm holding out hope that their will eventually be some kind of flash of two worlds style crossover
torinju didn't the force take on a physical form in star wars the clone wars or something
TheRezro you mean like from the force unleashed or did they use that name again somewhere else
This is how I see it. And I saw the light/dark nature of the Force as being inspired by Taoist concepts of dualism, where the two halves are a single whole, inseparable from one another. Yoda's attitude suggests this, and Obi Wan's comment to Anakin makes a lot of sense from that perspective. The concept of balance is important to 'good' Jedi, whereas the Sith do not or cannot accept it.
The series doesn't do a perfect job of adhering to this, of course. It's often drawing on inspirations it doesn't fully understand. But this is the core of the jedi in Star Wars at its best, imo.
Minor nitpick: Immaculate Conception does not refer to Jesus being conceived without intercourse, but to Mary being conceived without sin (at 8:00-8:10).
true
damn, fresh out of my ARH minor and i didnt catch that
How was mary conceived without sin
@@leephillips4402 In vitro fertilization?
@@leephillips4402 Catholics believe that Mary did not have her parents original sin passed down to her.
Bad dialogue aside, the Star Wars prequels really were full of depth and had a lot of good material in them.
In retrospect, I find the prequel's references to moral relativism interesting, because as far as I remember, Vader and the Emperor never try to deny being evil or embracing the dark side in the original movies. They don't seem concerned with good and evil at all. They aren't fighting the rebels because they think the rebels are evil, they're fighting them because they are an obstacle to power. Power over the Force and the universe is what the Sith are about, whereas classic Yoda seemed to preach a philosophy of accepting the universe as it was. When jedi are on the edge of falling to the dark side, it's usually because they reject this in order to exercise personal power, even if it's for a good cause, like Luke trying to kill the emperor.
In episode 2, C3PO refers to Anakin as "the maker" when he returns to save his mother.
thats actually really cool, because c3p0 and r2 get their "memory disks" or whatever wiped at the end of episode III so c3p0 picked up the habit of thanking the maker back when he knew who it was (anakin) but for episodes IV onward he has no idea who he is thanking (darth vader).
Wow man, this essay ties in perfectly with where The Last Jedi ended up taking the Force.
Thank you so much for the video-essays you are creating here. Since I dicovered your channel I´m totaly in awe about the high standard of your content. A lot of what you are saying gives me to think. About the art of film and the different topics you bring up aswell. I´m looking forward to what´s coming next.
Literally just finished watching A New Hope, will watch The Empire Strikes Back tomorrow
+Jake Maringoni I'm gonna watch all of them in a marathon before I'll see episode 7 in two days from now. For once I am glad being a European :D
I think that the prequel trilogy is an allegory for the fall of heaven. Think about it, Anakin is Lucifer, Obi Wan is Michael, Yoda is God, Sidious is the Darkness. The fight between Anakin and Obi Wan ends in Anakin burning in a figurative hell. The fight between Yoda and Sidious is a representation of the battle of good and evil, and evil won.
Thank you! Sorry spam.
isn't that what happened in supernatural?
+Nero Wayne (Wyvern Dracul) Yes and No, it's more of a speculation and interpretation thing. There are some evidence that suggests the darkness in revaluation 6:12. "I looked when He broke the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth made of hair, and the whole moon became like blood;" Supernatural only interprets this into a literal force. The way I interpreted it was an opposite to God. The darkness to me is something that defines seduction, you look into the darkness and though you fear it, curiosity gets the better. Intrigued it sends you literally and figuratively into darkness. God is the opposite, God is the light in the dark that gives comfort, ancient and stern powerful but gentle. Seem familiar?
+Nero Wayne (Wyvern Dracul) You can ague in the book of Genesis verse here too. "Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness."
A nice discussion of the Star Wars in the context of mythos, morality and religious concepts. Film subtext can often be as interesting (or more so) than the surface.
So good. I'm enjoying your work immensely.
Great video friend. Absolutely well made and very insightful
Fantastic video! I was always bugged by the simplicity of the "dark & light" philosophy presented in Star Wars, but this makes me think I've been to hard on it. Either way, it was a great look at spirituality and morality through the lense of some fantastic movies.
I really wish that Lucas had had someone to help with his script for the prequels because just a few lines could have made a big difference. On midichlorians alone, the explanation could have been so simple: they are a harmless, microscopic life form attracted to the Force, and testing their numbers in blood is one of the ways to use science/technology to measure Force strength in a person. Midichlorians don't create the Force, they just congregate in large numbers wherever it's present.
I took midiclorians as symbiotic organisms they don’t create the force but live in beings that have the force. The stronger the connection to the force the larger the number of midiclorians. Counting the midiclorians is a easy way to determine a persons power.
That's pretty much my philosophy really makes you appreciate star wars even more
What i never understood was that in episode 4 the guy says that the force is a "Ancient religion" but 30 years ago the Jedi were everywhere in the galaxy. If the catholic church disbanded people wouldn't consider it ancient after 30 years.
+MrThedorkknight I think the guy was calling it an 'Ancient Religion' because the Jedi had existed for over thousand generations.
+MrThedorkknight Ancient only means old. For example: In ancient Rome, the Romans generally left the Jews alone because they considered Judaism to be an ancient religion. They had no problem shunning the Christians because they saw it as new (even if Christians, both Gentile ones and Jewish ones didn't see themselves in that fashion).
Yeah things turn into myths really quickly in star wars but then it's a big galaxy right now anyone of us could easily face time someone in isreal but when it took years for Christianity to come to this country i guess it's like that
I'm sorry but what you mean is the Incarnation of Christ: the Immaculate Conception is the birth of the Virgin Mary by natural means of two parents but her soul was kept from the original sin of the fall of Adam and Eve: I'm into theology: this something many get mixed up : I hope not being Insulting : I do enjoy your show
C3PO in Attack of the clones, sees Anikan for the first time and years and proclaims "The Maker!" Indicating that The Maker is the one who built the droid.
I die a little inside every time you say the Expanded Universe doesn't count, Leon.
*sigh* So much good stuff, lost in a puff of corporate rebooting.
*****
True, and for an analysis of the movies alone or the current canon universe, it makes sense to exclude it. Personally, I find it limiting to be restricted to the movies alone when there's so many stories and ideas in the EU that have only recently been decanonized and have yet to be overwritten by new material.
I also find it frustrating that Disney corporate can step in and decide what stories are important and meaningful and worthy of discussion, and which can be discarded as irrelevant on the basis of canon... but until I can scrounge up $4 billion to buy Star Wars, I guess that's their call and not mine XD
+Marcus Williams Lucas, despite the criticism he gets, he actually, despite saying the Expanded Universe in his eyes were an expansion and only considered the six movies his headcanon in numerous interviews, did try to save the EU according to various reports, by making the next Star Wars movies to take place 100-200 Years after Return of the Jedi, therefore the EU would live on and Disney gets to create a blank slate and add their own twist to Star Wars with the EU still being canon.
But Disney threw his story treatments in the trash because, 'Refusal to pay royalty fees'
Huh, now I'm curious to see what his treatments would have been... though I imagine Disney also wanted to bank on bringing back the classic trilogy actors and characters, since that seems like what audiences at large are more interesting.
While I have a lot of issues with what Lucas did with Star Wars in the prequels and the Clone Wars cartoon, I do have to give him credit for giving the EU a lot of breathing room, and even for allowing it to exist and expand so much in the first place.
Yeah, that too, Gallifreyan Jedi also reported in his blog video 'Revisiting Disney's Invalidation of the Star Wars EU' that they're considering bring back EU Characters, just giving them different names so to not pay royalty fees, such as Mara Jade.
+Neo-Reality Entertainment I'd heard about the possibility of bringing Mara Jade back in Star Wars Rebels (mixed feelings about that), but with a different name. Didn't know about the royalty fees, though... I'd figured because Timothy Zahn wrote the books for Lucasfilm under their Star Wars brand, all the characters therein would become property of Lucasfilm.
Hmm... it would suck to have to not be able to refer to Mara Jade as Mara Jade, but if they at least brought her look and personality back, I'd probably still enjoy the character well enough.
I liked the angle of Ani as Jesus. It made me think of Last Temptation of Christ which is basically What If Jesus Accepted the Devil’s Offer?
I always figured midichlorians were just an easy way for the Jedi to identify new recruits. Unlike sensing the force, a count of little critters in a being can be done by machines.
Hey was just wondering, what is the music you like using in the background. Its really lovely, and familiar to me but dont remember the name.
Thank you for this. Much appreciation!
Small note: "immaculate conception" does not refer to the virgin birth of Jesus, it refers to *Mary's being born without sin.* Jesus's birth is an "incarnation." This is a common mistake, though, and doesn't take much away from your thoughtful analysis.
One problem I had with this video is the assertion that morals based of a creator based world is disproven. i can only speak from one view on creator based morality but according most creator based morals, these morals are not arbitrary as Leon insists that they would be, they exist to sere the purpose of whatever helps life or glorifies the creator. Nor would said morals be something that existed before the creator, he invented them to serve his purpose.
That is if we work on the premise that those holy books are incorrect.
I've always seen the Force as less of an abstract Good/Evil and more as a 'great power brings great responsability' thing. The Force grants you power to accomplish the things you want, and it's up to you to use it with compassion, order and knowledge to do what is best to everyone, and would lean towards democracy, or to use it with hate, selfishness and greed to fullfill your own disires, rule over everyone else and people will inevitably be turning on each other. That's Light and Dark for me, and sometimes maybe a balance is needed as neither the iron-fist empire and backstbing sith, or the corrupt republic and foolish jedi were perfect.
Or maybe I'm just an indecisive forever neutral person.
Anyway, the force will be with us all, always.
TheRezro If there is one thing good about the removal of the EU from canon is that we can just pick what is truly good and forget remaing. Yay for head-canon.
One possible interpretation of the force is that it's something like the Tao and that by taking things to the extreme both Jedi and Sith became corrupted and this ultimately led to the consequences we see in the film
Light and Dark duality in Star Wars seems to be either the moral absolutism found in most monotheistic religions or balance of forces found in eastern philosophies. It interesting how the Sith would think of the Jeti as evil. When I look at the light side of the force it seems more towards (Apollonian, collectivism, and Order). The Dark side of the force is more (Dionysian, individualism, and Chaos). One interesting theory is Darth Vader was bringing the balance but he had to bring it on both sides. Both sides had their idea on what is balance. The Jeti seem to want harmony the Sith want revenge. And at the end they both got what they want.
The story of Good and Evil go back but so does chaos and order. But in the second one they play their role in the universe. But neither should have the upper-hand. George Lucas's "thx 1138" shows a world that seems very much on the side of order and it not a great place to be in as it is devoid of emotion and autonomy. This idea of balance can be found in many fictions, the Michael Moorcock's Multiverse, Lego Universe, Demolition man, Werewolf the Apocalypse, Mage the Ascension, Ultima VII serpent isle and plenty more.
The interesting thing about logic and emotions in morals is they are both complex. A lot of people may think logic is better at morals over emotions. But emotions are what help us feel compassion and justice and other virtues. Yes there are emotions that push us to vice. In addition also to much emotions with little rational and composer to control them can lead to rash decisions that are also destructive. Yoda Talking about fear seem paradoxical. Yes it can lead to irrational emotions that lead to suffering but they also fear training Skywalker. Fear is that warning of some danger so is it always irrational? Lets say you run into a Lion. It seems rational to be scared, but if you can collect yourself you may come up with a better tactic to survive. But if you get into panic (fight or flight) you are mostly going to get killed. People with next to no emotions treat other people like furniture so I am not sure I would say emotions are bad. Also there is a conditions known as Alexithymia that give people a lack of emotional stimuli, meaning the they will also lack empathy, intuition, and imagination.
I'm curious to know how Episode 7 fits into the spiritual themes of the franchise?
the spirit of consumerism? :P
Wait till the whole sequel trilogy is done before making a judgement on that.
Well, slavery is illegal in the Republic, but Tatooine is in Hutt space. The Jedi can't legally supercede that. Which is stated in the movie, if I remember correctly.
Anakin does redeem himself in the end because Star Wars has a very eastern ethos, I'll elaborate.
He created his own hell out of attachment. It started with killing his wife, breaking his body, and warring with his kids. If he dies from this attachment, he'll forever be separated from his son, himself, and the whole galaxy. No force ghosting. But he was able to let go of unhealthy attachment in order to focus on the Right attachments, especially toward his family.
Special about Star Wars?
Et tu, Leon? ;) :P
+Renegade Cut It's alright. I honestly expect it. It's pertinent, topical, and I have to say, you did touch on various topics that most of the other videos and articles I've seen haven't. So it was a bit of a new perspective. Kudos to you for that (I stole the Kudos from Linkara. He won't miss them. He gives them out like candy, anyway).
I always thought Han’s line about hell was no more indicative of there being an actual hell in Star Wars than the word “rendezvous” is proof that the French exist in Star Wars.
To me it’s more like the audience has a babelfish
What is that song playing at the end of the video? I tried to Shazam it, but came up with a bunch of random stuff...
thanks Leon!
So what song was it? Driving me nuts trying to find out. lol
Background music?
I don't remember. I made this episode years ago.
fantastic episode leon
I don't think that a jedi being able to appear as a spirit necessarily suggests a western style after-life, let alone that spirit being in Heaven. It may tell us they have a soul, but it says nothing about where that soul resides after death. Given how much the original films owe to eastern philosophy, it could just as easily suggest that spirits are a part of the human world, a la Shinto and other animist traditions. The Force itself kind of already implies this. Anakin appearing after death only tells us he is a dead force user, not whether he was redeemed in the eyes of a creator god who may or may not exist.
I have to disagree with the statement that "one the most constant features of hell is that it is eternal". Western Christianity believes in it (although it is becoming less and less popular, in Europe at-least), but Eastern Christianity for the most part does not (leading to Origin's infamous statement that even Satan will one day be saved from Hell). In Islam it is a hotly debated issue which mostly comes down to how you interpret certain Arabic words. Judaism has no strong consensus on the after-life in general and it doesn't on this sub-topic either. Dharmic religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, etc.) explicitly does not have an eternal hell (the different level of horribleness of different hells are often expressed by how long a life in one of them lasts, but none of them are eternal). Sikhism also believes in a temporary heaven and hell followed by rebirth. The same with Chinese religions. And Zoroastrianism believes that hell will only last until Ahuramazda wins over Angra Mainyu and destroys ontological evil; at which point the souls in Hell will be freed and evil and suffering will become metaphysically impossible.
*****: Fair enough. I still think the wording "more common" can be easily misleading or misunderstood though, as the concept of an eternal hell is far less common than the opposite (although precise numbers on this front are impossible to gather, especially if you are talking historically rather than contemporary).
I have to point out that eternal punishment in Hell is almost uniquely a Christian concept. The Muslims believe in almost identical Hell, but they believe that it is finite for most of its denizens, depending on the exact denomination -- according to some even the Devil will eventually be redeemed, even if it takes an incredibly long time. The Hells in Buddhist faith are likewise finite, transient states of being, just like everything else outside Nirvana.
Even a good chunk of Christians have grown uncomfortable with the concept of everlasting punishment, and seek to reinterpret the Biblical passages alluding to such a possibility. The Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, believe that unbelievers will simply cease to be if they don't repent their ways; they don't suffer, they just die permanently.
*****
And for all other Christians, as per the Bible, everybody gets the same final reward, no matter how late in life they repent.
But that doesn't change the fact that in traditional Christianity Hell itself is considered an eternal punishment, although the Bible fails to directly describe one, instead just stating that those who act against God are going to suffer in unspecified manner.
Yeah midichlorians are like an antenna for the force. So many people get hung up on them. Good video!
Just a small nitpick, but it's basically only in Christianity that hell is considered eternal. Islamic sources are conflicted on the topic, but often citing the (much more sympathetic) idea that everyone will be forgiven at the end of days. In all the hell realms of the dharmic religions, punishment is long but not eternal (though it lasts for aeons in the worst of the hells, Avīci) - a concept of an eternal hell would severely clash with the central idea of saṃsāra in dharmic thought. The impermanence of all things is the root of suffering in saṃsāra, and only nirvāṇa, liberation from the cycle of suffering, can be eternal. So the idea of eternal hell in Christianity is not necessarily the norm among world religions, but rather a deviant and malevolent concept.
I think that midichlorians are still a reductionist way to express what it is the force, if the force is a spiritual entity, how is it possible that the force can be quatified?, I think that the force is a trascendental philosophy more than an animism, I think is more similar to neoplatonic mysticism (or very close to the augustinian positive theology) than the Spinoza's pantheism for example, so I still think that even though the force can interact with living and material things, his entity is sitll above those kinds of being, and cannot be measured through its interaction with them,
+Chas X i's not incompatible with what I said
But didn't all Jedi have midochlorians?
I like your analysis and agree with the overview. My point was more about being a kid and playing as a Jedi, doesn't the midrochlorian thing mean that you can never grow up to be a jedi? Or have I misunderstood? It just seems counter intuitive to create a great kids fantasy then yank it away in the sequels.
And now the complete first post turns up. I hate the internet. Sorry. :)
+Saintly Pants Except that Luke, both in the movies and the novels based on them, had no problem channeling the force through his artificial hand as it had become a part of his being.
+TheXell: Maybe he was channeling it through his stump?
Painocus
No, I remember the novel being particular about that.
I'm not gonna freak out cause you didn't use Sebastian Shawn but it was pretty brave of you i guess
So, in regard to the force and your analysis. where would the Yuuzhan Vong stand? They are extra-galactic species that are for the most part immune to the Force, unable to be sensed through it, swayed by the Jedi mind trick, or thrown through Force telekinesis. Ignoring the whole canonicity issue (because let's face it that whole "the expanded universe is no longer canon" thing is just complete bull), where would they stand in all this?
KOTOR 2 best defines the force. Play it to believe it.
Reminder: The Holiday Special is canon. :)
D not anymore
Fantasy is an interpretation or exploration of past real-world events in a safe fictional setting, so science-fantasy is a sub-genre that fits Star Wars like a glove. Religion is an important part of humanity's history, so why not explore it in a fanastical setting like Star Wars? Don't dismiss fantasy as just wizards and dragons, which (by the way) have their real-world allegories and weren't just created out of thin air to simply mark something as genre-fiction.
STAIR WARES, your one stop shop for all vertical displacement.
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes," says the guy who preached that Vader could never be saved because once you turn evil, you can never not be evil again.
Actually, I want to add that an interesting aspect of these films that often gets overlooked, while the Force can be proved to exist in this universe because of the power it grants to people, the actual Jedi religion is at various times shown to be one that's not perfect. It has doctrines that prove false in the end. The notion mentioned above, that Vader could not be saved, is a religious one that the Jedi have applied to their understanding of the Force and that proves untrue.
In the prequels (which, for the record, I am loathe to bring up), the Jedi council believes in a prophecy and they try to act on it, but in so doing end up creating Darth Vader through blind adherence to dogma when Anikin needed more careful, individual guidance.
So, really, the Force is a thing that exists and the Jedi order is a religion built up around it, which, as a human endeavor, has its flaws. In that respect, the Star Wars films actually have some complex undertones to them which are not immediately apparent to casual viewing.
cheezemonkeyeater
It's even simpler than that. "Only a Sith deals in absolutes" says the guy using an absolute to decry absolutes.
If I know modern Hollywood, it will probably say, "Stop thinking about it so much. Enjoy the action, you nerd!"
The Force = Ki
NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTION: STOP WATCHING VIDEOS WHY I HATE THE LAST JEDI! Ooops, already failed! Sorry.
The Last Jedi is good, actually.
soo... if jesus turned evil he would have converted into a sith lord?! wow
Midichlorians reduce the Force to a biological coincidence. In the prequels, access to the Force is nothing you can strive or have to work for anymore-it just became something you happen to have or not, depending how many symbiotic organisms lived inside your body. If you have more than 20,000 Midichlorians, you become a whiny young adult without personality and a highly questionable moral compass, and later Darth Vader.
How engrossing and fascinating! Not.
A lot of the rather spiritual/animistic mythology in the Star Wars universe got explained away or simply ignored and contradicted in the prequels.
In that light it’s rather tragic and comical how soulless, flat and artificial the prequels feel in comparison to the first trilogy-a perfect match to the Midichlorian “explanation” of the force.
I'm surprised Chi did not come up.
Or the Jedi/Jidai, Sith/Sikh naming trivia.
But I can see a clear understanding of the force within Star Wars. There is no moral absolutism in my opinion, with there being the Force and a dark side to that force. I don't think a light side is ever mentioned. There is only the Force and its dark, taboo side. Kind of like countries having the right to self-defence and armies, but also weapons considered inhumane and things viewed as war crimes.
So the Jedi are just the visible majority of the Force users deciding on which practices were allowed and which weren't.
Also another interesting fact which people don't look into as much as they should... Jedi mind tricks. We know that the Jedi can use their jedi mind trick to alter someone's way of thinking. This is even considered okay and moral.
So what if the force or specific force techniques alter the jedi's mind as well?
***** Are they though? What is the Force keeps affecting Jedi and Sith all the time without them knowing?
***** And those are canon?
These ¨evil¨ lines from revenge of the Sith are so cringe-worthy. Such an interesting theme ruined by bad dialog...
Agreed. Not only are they delivered in what can only be described as "the worst acting ever not done by Tommy Weiseau," they're so badly written. Nobody talks like that. Nobody in real life says, "From my point of view (anything)."
It's rather useless to analyze star wars in this fashion as it is utterly inconsistent and not very enlightening. George Lucas is no genius, he makes schlock and no amount of mental gymnastics will create depth where there is none...