PT and the problem of choice: Jedi, Clones and war!

Their purpose is not to fight in wars, but it seems they sure are darn good at it. As we see, they seem to know what they're doing when it comes time to take action against the Separatists. They seem to have taken to war like ducks to water, so I'd assume their training affords such circumstances.

Nor are they meant to be a standing army. But if deemed necessary, such as in an external threat to the Republic it seems they can be enlisted to help an army in a war effort to restore peace. If not, then as guardians of the Republic they could be letting the Republic fall into ruins, and it would all be irrelevant, as Lucas also says.
They are guardians of peace and justice. Guarding sometimes by necessity includes fighting back as a means of defending. Even preemptive strikes based on intel are part of defending, which was the case on Geonosis. Sometimes the best defense is a good offense.

And they're definitely not meant to be warlike. And they're most definitely not meant to start wars. There is a distinction to be made here between attacking as a defense, and attacking unprovoked, as in for conquest. As Alex said:Which is a very crucial point considering the name of the movie is Attack Of The Clones. Attack is a flashy word choice, invoking the thought of an unprovoked assault. But we learn they're attacking as a defense - creating a crafty little brain pretzel twist.

But yes, as adherents to the light side, their central focus is typically on the Force and their M.O. is normally promoting non-violence through diplomacy. Which they would resume back to after helping in a war.

The problem here is the Clone War raged on for three years. So when Lucas says the war corrupted the Jedi I'm guessing, but I suspect "corrupted" was shorthand for preoccupied, distracted from their usual lifestyle, but mostly, eventually resorting to doing unethical things they normally wouldn't in order to gain an edge in this prolonged war, and thus putting themselves into compromising positions. Such as betraying friendships to spy on the Chancellor of the Republic. Which is treason and against the Jedi code and - yes unbeknownst to them - put them and Anakin right where Sidious wanted them.

He says there was never a Jedi vs. Sith war, as in the Sith mostly killed each other, but implies elsewhere that the two did have battles. Even the frieze on Palpatine's antechamber wall depicts the Jedi engaging in a grand conflict. We don't know for sure if the Jedi never fought in a war, but the Clone War is definitely the first for any of the current living Jedi, and for this particular iteration of the Republic. But again, it's not like they were bungling their way through it. Though they're not meant to be full-time Generals by design, they can be when needed and are excellent Generals, so they seem to know a thing or two about how it all works. And the Republic doesn't seem to have any trained officers ready to hit the ground running.

I'm not sure if I'd say the picture being painted in the films, Lucas quotes and even TCW is that they'd avoid at all costs helping in a war effort to protect society. Of course they would hope it would never come to that, and perhaps it wouldn't really ever have if not for the Sith. Though typically pacifists, it's not so much they're an order of Ghandis, more like Shaolin Monks. Their skills in combat is precisely what makes them formidable enough to deter any troublemakers from going against them when they're sent in to settle disputes. "[George] wanted the audience to understand... how sophisticated the Jedi were in the art of battle." Rick McCallum, TPM Fights Featurette. And it's worked since the formation of the Republic.

But the Sith have been orchestrating their revenge for a long time and have taken advantage of an otherwise almost ideal as-you-can-get system to do so.



Is it that the Council doesn't want to hear what Qui-Gon has to say about the Sith returning? One assumes they're extinct and another in arrogance believes they'd know if the Sith had returned to activity, while Yoda acknowledges the obscurity of the dark side. They're willing to hear Qui-Gon out, but they of course need confirmation before jumping to conclusions. Especially since it's been a millennia. (This is all actually a brilliant Sith plan to get the Jedi off guard). They were quite willing to investigate the situation and identify the attacker asap - though perhaps underestimating the dark assassin's power.

Same with Anakin. They were willing to test him and give Qui-Gon's hypothesis a chance, "The Chosen One the boy may be", but they determined he was too old & fearful, and sensed danger in his possible training. This is a case of both the Jedi and Qui-Gon being right. Creating almost an impasse of a conundrum, which there are a bunch of in the PT.

Ultimately, my impression is not that they were incredulous towards Qui-Gon's reports, but pragmatically precautious... and sure, a little stodgy. For example, they can't just jump right on board every time someone comes in saying they've found the Chosen One and then induct them regardless of their background. There was some soft gate keeping going on, which is understandable, but I'd say full pushback is a bit strong.

Similar with the Senate. They have systems set up so that people can't go around crying wolf. But that system had become bogged down with procedure and rotted with corruption and now Sidious was pulling the strings. Not responding in some way in a timely manner to Amidala's plea is unacceptable. It seems Valorum was attempting to continue urging the Senate to take more immediate action for Naboo, but Mas Ameeda, Palpatine's henchman, changed his mind.

There are definitely parallels between Senators requiring proof of the invasion of Naboo and the Jedi wanting proof of the return of the Sith & Anakin being a vergence. As well as some sort of air of malaise amongst the two. And while some of the Council members are a bit smug, stuffy, gruff, protocol-based and less open-minded than say Qui-Gon, the difference is the Senate is the one directly under Palpatine's machinations. (Although arguments could be made that the Sith's planned absence has contributed to the Jedi's overconfidence and arrogance).

I think the Senate in TPM, heavily under Sidious' thumb, is a glimpse of what the Jedi Order could be if Palpatine were to also sink his claws into it as well. Which he later does by enlisting them to serve alongside the Clones, and moreover by getting Anakin onto the Council as his double-agent, as it were. I think one could say they were ripe for Palpatine's plucking by that time.
And likewise I think the Jedi Council in TPM provides a glimpse of what the Senate would be like without Palpatine's influence.

Interesting mirroring in Palpatine using Padmé to help him destroy democracy, then years later using Anakin to help him destroy the Jedi.




Do we know if Valorum hand-picked Qui-Gon? He may have, or he may have asked the Council to send whom ever was available and it happened to be him.


I think that's basically what this all comes down to. George put a bunch of irreconcilable dilemmas in his movies, so there must be something to be learned from them. Heck, Carl Jung says the key to the psyche and the basis of Individuation is being able to hold the tension of opposites without being torn by them. (And finding a symbol that unites them such as a yin/yang or a cross, etc. Balance). He says the fate of mankind depends on it.

The thrust of George's conversation with James Cameron is that in the Jedi's case, and throughout the PT, the characters find themselves in conundrums, in a collision of values.

That's all I'm trying to say, ultimately. I think that's what we're all trying to say in our own way. We all seem to agree they don't like to fight but they will if they have to. It just seems some emphasize the former while others the latter; creating a "tastes great", "less filling" cycle

Yeah, they have to raise the stick when it's necessary. Yes, It's reasonable that the Jedi lend their abilities to help protect the Republic from threats and in this case ongoing war. For me, I just tend to emphasize the dilemma, or irony, of it all - morally in regards to their relationship with the Force as adherents to the light side, and politically in their relationship with the Republic as peace keepers, not Generals. And in this particular case, the mindf**k of Palpatine's plans.

Tony opened this conversation by saying their choices doomed them. I'd emphasize they were doomed no matter which choices they made, in their circumstances. Because yes, they were put in a zugzwang predicament; forced to move and no matter which move they make, they lose. Or a Kobayashi Maru. Or, as you say:
And Sidious used their good intentions to steer them into his traps.
Maybe my answer to your question would be at least they went out defending the principles they believed in; the Republic and democracy. Even though at that point it was a dictatorship.

Perhaps the Jedi who thought the Order sold out should've been allowed to sit out the war as conscientious objectors or work as a Red Cross. But then again, the army needed all the Knights they could get. And Sidious' propaganda machine would've labeled them as traitors, etc.

It would certainly be a more convoluted phrasing for the opening crawl if it said the latter. I think it's inferred that Valorum asked the Council. After all, Qui-Gon later reports to the Council about his mission, not Valorum.

That said, if I'm not mistaken Valorum did send a Jedi on a mission without the Council knowing: Sifo-Dyas, to deal with the Pykes.

I reacted the way I did because it's more of a strawman accusation than anything else. I don't deny you your perspective, though. If that's what you see, fair enough.

To address the present discussion:




It could be that a rule-bending Jedi Master like Qui-Gon, full of worldly wisdom, was more apt to endorse Valorum's request -- assuming Valorum can generally make requests and not usually give direct orders to the Jedi. Thus, Qui-Gon may have been a linchpin or intermediary, of sorts, between Valorum and the Jedi Council, if the Council saw validity in Valorum's request and they realised this mission could be easily farmed out to Qui-Gon and his apprentice. Perhaps they wouldn't have endorsed a "secret dispatch" of two of their own otherwise.

At the start of their negotiating mission, when they arrive on the TF ship, the relatively green Obi-Wan asks his master how he thinks the Trade Federation "will deal" with Valorum's demands. Qui-Gon's relaxed, dismissive opinion is a sign of his confidence about the high likelihood of such missions succeeding (i.e., going in the Republic's favour), as well as his showing a tinge of Jedi arrogance. His response implies he's been around the block a few times and that this sort of thing is a piece of cake for Qui-Gon. Maybe Valorum was counting on Qui-Gon's confidence to quickly put an end to a serious situation and prevent it escalating further -- like Qui-Gon is Valorum's best Jedi lieutenant or whatever.

In other words, as speculative all as this is, Valorum and Qui-Gon could have had a professional relationship with one another (a healthier, more stable version of Anakin consorting with Palpatine during the Clone Wars), where they understood the necessity of sometimes bypassing red tape to get shit done -- just enough to keep chaos in check. Thus, the galaxy (or the Republic) falls further into darkness than anybody realises when Valorum is politically slayed (by Palpatine's senatorial "apprentice" Amidala) and Qui-Gon is physically slayed (by Palpatine's spiritual apprentice Darth Maul). Note that in AOTC, this sort of collegial dyad between Valorum and Qui-Gon (a political leader ordering a powerful Jedi to do stuff in secret for broader political ends) is replaced with Palpatine and Dooku, the latter of whom is plotting against the Republic as leader of the CIS (Qui-Gon's former Jedi Master, no less).

Yeah, that landing platform scene is significant, since we clearly see Qui-Gon and Valorum together, just that one time. There's a sense that Qui-Gon is not only confiding in Valorum, but almost apologising that the lid blew off and things are already spiralling -- albeit in that stoic way that embodies many prequel character interactions. And yep, Qui-Gon specifically says they must contact Chancellor Valorum when on their mission, and the Jedi Council isn't mentioned until Qui-Gon confers with Valorum on Coruscant.

When you think of it, Coruscant, the galactic capital, is where it all starts to go wrong for the good guys (and right for Palpatine). Valorum is deposed and Qui-Gon's request to train Anakin is turned down. Meanwhile, as absurd as it sounds, Amidala partnering with the Gungans and Jar Jar boasting they have a "grand army" almost seems to inspire Palpatine's subversion of the Republic with the clone army, like he heard their conversation through the Force or had his apartment wired up.


That's good. It's exactly the sort of parallelism I had in mind when I suggested the two are operating from the same playbook and may be professional friends. Note that Qui-Gon is easily able to get into rhythm with other characters in the film, even with condescension and equivocation ("Patience, my blue friend"), on multiple worlds. It seems easy to imagine him building a rapport with a man like Valorum. Of course, the parallels work regardless. I think you have tapped what Lucas was getting at in that earlier quote about the Jedi and the bureaucrats in the Senate being the "inactive forces" working against the main characters. In fact, it neatly answers the fan complaint, "Who is the main protagonist of TPM?" In a way, as the "active force", it's Palpatine. From another point of view, it is the assembly of characters (like Palpatine) trying to fight (or, in Amidala's case, coming to recognise) the bureaucratic sloth and idleness around them.

Yes, that's brilliant. They alone opposed the evil and gazed into its dark heart. Valorum realizes that there's no fighting the Vote of No Confidence since he has been mired by accusations of corruption, which were surely supplied by Palpatine. Qui-Gon, in my interpretation, similarly realizes that he can't win against Maul in a one-on-one fight. Both perhaps sense the overwhelming power of the dark side enveloping them. Palpatine's dark influence is in both instances. He is directly influencing the senate with the dark side, while Maul acts as his right hand and overwhelms Qui-Gon.

And no problem, it's great to read your interpretations of things.

That is also a very interesting idea. There's a similar situation in both instances. The Naboo nor the Republic had an army, and then one is discovered in the nick of time. Perhaps that is where Palpatine got the idea for a hidden army.

It's also an interesting progression of the theme of dehumanization in the prequels. We go from a "grand army" of natives defending their own planet, to a faceless clone "grand army" created by very "grey" aliens outside the Republic that is led by a debased Jedi Order waging war on multiple planets.

Listening to the "archival interviews" commentary track on AotC, Lucas twice brings up the issue of arrogance on the part of the Jedi. First when Yoda says that arrogance has become a "flaw more and more common among the Jedi, even the older, more experienced ones," he says that Obi-Wan may be suffering from the same hubris as Anakin, and again when the Jedi don't have the information on Kamino, while Dexter has. He says that the Jedi are arrogant and think they know everything. Jocasta Nu does come off arrogant when she claims that "If an item does not appear in our records, it doesn't exist." So the Jedi think they have all the correct information in the galaxy.

I think that is what Dave Filoni is basing his comments on the Jedi on: "The rest of the Jedi are so detached, and they've become so political, that they've really lost their way. Yoda starts to see that in the second film, but Qui-Gon is ahead of them all and that's why he's not part of the council." I don't believe the Jedi were meant to be portrayed as either perfect or evil. I believe they were meant to be somewhat arrogant and suffering from hubris.

Yes, it's no secret the Jedi developed arrogance and hubris. What's interesting to me is the wide array of fan reactions to it. There's everything from shocked, to miffed, to "It's just written that way to serve the needs of the plot", to "Aha, Gotcha!"

For starters, I don't think there should be much surprise. I mean, generally speaking, it's something that happens at some point to every group. It's all a very organic development. And I'd think, to be expected. It's a problem, to be sure, but a common one. It wasn't shoe-horned in just to serve the plot. It's inevitable human nature. Especially for those who have experienced periods of success and little in the way of worthy adversaries. Which brings out the other side of the coin here: I think the brilliance of the Sith going into exile and seeming as though extinct was that it helped usher the Jedi towards their sense of over self-assurance. After many centuries of taking care of the galaxy's problems with relative ease, it only follows that they'd let their guard down a bit and coast on a "we got this" mentality.

The PT is a tragic mythical tale about the Republic becoming an Empire, a good person turning evil, and the Jedi Order being wiped out. And as such, each of these entities need a tragic flaw, or hamartia. It makes so much perfect sense for the Jedi's hamartia to be hubris that I couldn't imagine it being anything else.


The other thing about arrogance is that it is insidious. One usually cannot see it in themselves. And if even if it were to be pointed out, it's so hard to see that denial is inevitable. Some ask, if Yoda saw the arrogance, why didn't he do something about it? The unfortunate fact is, because of the nature of arrogance, it's just not that easy. Imagine Yoda assembled all 10,000 Jedi into an auditorium and said, "We're too arrogant, we need to stop." They'd just go, "What's he talking about?"


I also see out there a lot of shade thrown towards the Republic and the system they had set up and the Jedi's involvement with it. Fact is, it was a system that worked really well. I'd consider the situation as good as could realistically could be hoped for, and it presided over a thousand years of peace and freedom. To name a couple things: it utilized the Jedi as guardians of peace and justice in service to the people, without also affording them the opportunity to gain too much political power, and it kept the Republic power structure from possessing a centralized military with which to potentially use for tyranny. But the problem is, these very things were also the loopholes through which Palpatine could weave his master plan. It was a good system, but again, no system, and no person is perfect, nor immune to entropy of some kind.

Yes, the Jedi are to blame for their arrogance, there are ways to keep that at bay. And yes, likewise, the Republic is to blame for their corruption. Just as Anakin is to blame for his fear and greed. Palpatine took advantage of all of these. But of the three, at least the Jedi weren't seeking anything for selfish gain.


When it comes to a lot of things in the PT, I think the point is that life is full of conundrums.

I think this captures things rather definitively:

I feel like the PT is like mental training to get us to handle dilemmas better, and to look at others' reasonings for things. I mean, yes, Lucas makes it clear that things come down to greed vs. selflessness, we're meant to observe that in the characters, and to see the consequences of those dispositions. And also to see the importance of humility, which is what brings all that selflessness and compassion into harmony. But that also, not everything has such an easy answer.

I think these quotes apply very poignantly to Luke's predicament on the Death Star II. He went into the Emperor's throne room thinking the Rebels were going to knock out the shield generator and destroy the Death Star in a surprise attack. And Luke was even willing to die onboard the Death Star if need be.

However, it was all part of the Emperor's trap. He wove his plans to crush the rebellion and turn Luke together into one grand plan.

Unlike Anakin though, Luke didn't crave any particular powers with which to be lured towards the dark side. All Luke really wanted was for the Empire to end, and hopefully for his father to turn back. Palpatine hadn't been grooming Luke for years and knew this was the only thing that could get him to act on his dark emotions.
Even on Bespin, Vader knew trying to get Luke to fight him in order to save his friends was the only avenue for turning him.

Going in, Luke vowed not to act on these. Not to attack the Emperor or Vader. Just kill time until the Death Star is blown up. But when he witnessed Palpatine's devious trap unfold, which would cripple the Rebellion thus allowing the Empire to continue unfettered, he was pincered into a corner where his basic human instincts were put to the test and he couldn't help but act in a protective, defensive way. He felt he could no longer just sit idly by and watch as the Emperor destroyed all hope from the galaxy. While he was right there, right next to the evil man, lightsaber within reach, able to do something, to stop the destruction.

Was trying to strike down the Emperor the right thing to do?

I'm not sure how easy the answer to that question is supposed to be. Or at least, how much were supposed to blame Luke. Lucas is intentionally creating the quandries for the heroes. I'd say he's trying to portray the dilemmas we all face in life as individuals and as a society. And illustrate how good people and nations go bad. By acting on their good, basic human instincts in dire situations. Then those impulses being taken advantage of and taken too far, but all still in the name of good, until they're doing evil while still convincing themselves it's good.

Luke fortunately realized the road he was going down. He looked upon Vader and within himself and understood that his father had been manipulated in the very same way he just was. And that he was no different than his father, which awoke the deepest compassion for Anakin and simultaneously inspired him to reroute himself back to the light path.

Anakin and the Rebels still had to do the heavy lifting (couldn't resist the pun) and the fighting. But again, just like he did on Bespin, Luke knew that the galaxy was better of with him dead than as a dark sider, and did not want to be part of the root problem and continue the cycle.

By throwing down his weapon, Luke won the moral victory. But we have to ask: if he and all the other Rebels involved in the battle had died that day, what would the future of the Galaxy look Like? Fortunately, Anakin did the right thing and took action against the Emperor and ended the horror and allowed the people of the galaxy to get back up on their feet, so we don't have to answer that question. But I reckon the point is there is a time and place for everything and everybody and we need to think about these things, and sharpen our sense of right and wrong and how far is too far.