|
Post by Seeker of the Whills on Jan 10, 2022 21:50:16 GMT
(I put this in the Disney section so new developments from the shows could be discussed.) What is the deal with Tusken Raiders? They are one of the most mysterious alien species in Star Wars. What are the origins of their conflict with the moisture farmers? Are they the indigenous people of Tatooine, and are humans settlers? Are the Tuskens innately violent, or is it part of their culture? Can they be communicated with? Were the women and children part of torture practices? I think they are raiders whose way of life includes killing humans and taking their food and water. The human settlers may have originally upset the Tuskens by taking their lands, but the Tuskens are a warrior culture. I suspect they were about to steal the water from the Lars' moisture vaporators when they stumbled upon Shmi and decided to kidnap her. There may have been bad blood between the Tuskens and the humans, but torturing an innocent to death is a step further. Anakin would then continue the cycle of violence by killing their innocents in return.
|
|
|
Post by Alexrd on Jan 11, 2022 11:28:53 GMT
They are a nomadic, violent people that roam and live on the deserts of Tatooine.
Why Disney has suddenly decided to pick the Tuskens of all people and consistently whitewash them in their works I have no idea. (or maybe I do)
|
|
|
Post by Seeker of the Whills on Jan 11, 2022 14:14:51 GMT
They are a nomadic, violent people that roam and live on the deserts of Tatooine. Why Disney has suddenly decided to pick the Tuskens of all people and consistently whitewash them in their works I have no idea. (or maybe I do)You're an expert on Lucas quotes. Has he ever commented on the Tuskens? To my knowledge he hasn't talked about them much. We know that they were going to appear in The Clone Wars, and a Tusken shaman would have been introduced. Is there any information regarding that episode? I think the Tuskens in the Disney shows do largely fit what we see in the films, though this new tribe in The Book of Boba Fett is slightly different. The people on Tatooine see them as savages, like Cliegg did. Even the Tuskens that are cooperative thanks to the Mandalorian's ability to speak with them are said to have raided Mos Pelgo and killed their people. The tribe in BoBF are also torturers and slavers, and they mention that all the other tribes survived by killing. I don't think the Tuskens are suddenly good guys. I think that is just the media misrepresenting the material.
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on Jan 11, 2022 14:39:54 GMT
The only thing I know of that George has said on them is in the AotC commentary: [In the kitchen scene...] "we also begin establish that the Tusken Raiders are not completely human, that they're disliked and treacherous and deadly." By that I don't think he means biologically, the species is irrelevant. I'm sure he means morally, and I'm pretty sure he more specifically means from the settlers' points of view. He seems to be basically paraphrasing Cliegg's pov. There seems to be a lot of friction and animosity between the settlers and the Tuskens. Not much else is officially stated as far as their history and culture that I'm aware of (Lucas era canon). I don't know if the settlers are encroaching on their land, or what. But it seems certain that on Tatooine and in the galaxy at large, their lives don't seem to matter just enough that if someone were to kill some of them, nobody would really bat an eye. (Except of course unless a Jedi were to do so). They're violence and savagery leads them to be seen as less than human, which is a mindset that goes back through human civilization. The film The Searchers is a nice parallel for this part of the movie, not only visually but in this attitudinal aspect of settlers vs. uncivilized indigenous populations.
|
|
|
Post by Seeker of the Whills on Jan 11, 2022 15:13:27 GMT
There's now been talk of sand people being problematic and all that. I think Lucas is making a point with them, that the galaxy, or at least Tatooine, is still somewhat in a state similar to the western idea of cowboys vs. Indians. I definitely don't think that he is in any way malicious. Those accusations were made against TPM as well, which is just absurd.
There is a great quote from the "archival interviews" commentary track of ANH, where Lucas talks about prejudice against droids. Though I think he forgot about the Tuskens when making the comment.
"It's about the prejudice against droids, which is again symbolic of people intolerant of things that aren't similar to themselves. In this case, life-forms. Obviously there was a wide variety of life-forms in this movie - and this scene in particular - who are very, very different and very odd. But they're prejudiced basically against non-life-forms. So at least one of the ideas here is we've gotten to the point of accepting life-forms, no matter how different they look. They're all part of the same life process."
|
|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Jan 11, 2022 21:01:09 GMT
Considering the influence of The Searchers I would say that the Tuskens are absolutely based on indigenous peoples. And of course, when you have a settler situation, violence between the two peoples is gonna be a thing, sadly. It doesn't surprise me to hear that there is talk of Tuskens being "problematic," lol, given their Western roots. Back in University, I took a feminist media studies course, so I saw the entire spectrum of tropes that feminists consider problematic, haha. By the end of that course, I was so ready for it to be over. Alexrd Do tell.
|
|
|
Post by Alexrd on Jan 12, 2022 18:43:40 GMT
The people on Tatooine see them as savages, like Cliegg did. More importantly, we do see them as savages based on their actions and consistent portrayal in the movies. They were conceived to be that way. One of the many dangers on Tatooine.
The Bedouins were one of the inspirations for the Tusken Raiders, they are desert nomads. But they don't represent any specific culture or behaviour but their own.
The only thing I know of that George has said on them is in the AotC commentary: [In the kitchen scene...] "we also begin establish that the Tusken Raiders are not completely human, that they're disliked and treacherous and deadly." By that I don't think he means biologically, the species is irrelevant. I'm sure he means morally, and I'm pretty sure he more specifically means from the settlers' points of view. He seems to be basically paraphrasing Cliegg's pov. True. It's a moral statement, not biological. lol I don't really want to since it's so pervasive and depressing, but I think you touched on it. Those same amoral narcissists that find everything and everyone "problematic" have left the factory and entered the workforce, and are now in positions of power in the corporate world, which in turn owns the pop culture cornerstones of which Star Wars is but one example. So Star Wars is now one of the many victims of the on-going cultural vandalism that has been going on. there's no right and wrong / all cultures are equal / they have feelings too / blah blah blah *sigh*
|
|
|
Post by Seeker of the Whills on Jan 12, 2022 19:10:00 GMT
Let's not forget that Lucas called Anakin's deed a "terrible revenge" and "completely inappropriate." So despite being known for their savagery, the Tuskens are still beings of human intelligence. Padmé is shocked at what Anakin did, Qui-Gon yells "NO!" from beyond the grave, and Anakin did not tell the Jedi because they would disapprove.
|
|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Jan 12, 2022 19:12:53 GMT
Yes, Lawrence of Arabia is probably a big influence to begin with, not just in The Book of Boba Fett. So yeah, it could be a little silly, despite being inspired by certain real-world peoples, to say that the Tuskens are somehow a literal value judgment about those real-world peoples.
|
|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Jan 12, 2022 19:14:23 GMT
Let's not forget that Lucas called Anakin's deed a "terrible revenge" and "completely inappropriate." So despite being known for their savagery, the Tuskens are still beings of human intelligence. Padmé is shocked at what Anakin did, Qui-Gon yells "NO!" from beyond the grave, and Anakin did not tell the Jedi because they would disapprove. Yes. We understand Anakin's anger because, after all, his mother is one the kindest people you'll ever meet, but his reaction to her death was always framed by the movie as not okay. You don't even need the commentary for that.
|
|
|
Post by jppiper on Jan 12, 2022 19:21:59 GMT
Let's not forget that Lucas called Anakin's deed a "terrible revenge" and "completely inappropriate." So despite being known for their savagery, the Tuskens are still beings of human intelligence. Padmé is shocked at what Anakin did, Qui-Gon yells "NO!" from beyond the grave, and Anakin did not tell the Jedi because they would disapprove. And He would Probably be expelled from The Jedi Order.
|
|
|
Post by Alexrd on Jan 13, 2022 10:20:29 GMT
Let's not forget that Lucas called Anakin's deed a "terrible revenge" and "completely inappropriate." So despite being known for their savagery, the Tuskens are still beings of human intelligence. That's not the conclusion Lucas is reaching. Their sentience or sapience is beside the point. Anakin's actions are innapropriate because he exacted a massacre. Revenge is not okay (even more so for a Jedi). It doesn't matter if the Tuskens were guilty or innocent, it was the wrong thing to do. It was not self-defense.
|
|
|
Post by mikeximus on Jan 29, 2022 19:46:15 GMT
When it comes to the Sand People, I highly doubt Lucas had much development in mind for them when they were introduced in ANH. They were a storytelling tool that he used to introduce the hero to his mentor. The dangers of the world that Luke was not yet ready to face, and thus had to be saved by the old and wise mentor. Any development of the Sand People, as Lucas does with almost anything Star Wars, came over time. Then came the Prequels. It is Lucas that attaches the mirroring of the indigenous peoples of America to the Tuskens via the connection to the movie the Searchers. We see the Sand People are not monsters, or animals. This is something I talked about in depth on the Force.net boards years and years ago. Sometimes a picture is worth a thousands words: Clearly these are not "animals" they are sentient beings that are behaving very much like humans would. Children playing with pets, tending to a fire, doing chores, etc etc. This is Lucas showing us that these are not animals that they are more than just monsters or animals. Something I wrote on TFN years ago: With that one shot of the Tusken Camp, Lucas sets up that these are more than just animals living in the desert. The use of technology, fire, building materials, domestication of camp animals etc etc shows us that the relationship between the "settlers" and the Sand People is vindictive at best, thus there is no room for understanding. Each side sees the other as the "animal". Lucas sets up this. Lucas sets up that there is more to the Sand People than just nomadic marauders. I am no fan of the Book Of Boba Fett. However, it's pretty clear from AOTC what Lucas was trying to tell us about the Tuskens. They may not have the same civility as the settlers of Tatooine, however, morals is just something everyone constantly changes when they see fit. Here is a question I often put to people when this conversation comes up. What do any of YOU think the Lars rescue party would have done to the Tuskens had they found them with Shmi? As people try to pigeon hole the Sand People into a specific category, they have to ignore that the obvious answer is that the rescue party, those that are supposed to be NOT Tusken like, would have probably killed, slaughtered, taken prisoners, even probably tortured. How do we know this? Because that is how Lucas has Anakin respond. Anakin becomes that which he "fears" or is "angry" at. He becomes the very animal that he claims the Tuskens are. He acts on emotion.. instinct. Not on rational or reasonable behavior. So those that are supposed to be more "humanlike" on the level of morality not biology, become the animals themselves when they see fit. Lucas opened the door to the Tuskens being more than just animals, that there is a culture at work, another side to the story, not Disney. That's not the conclusion Lucas is reaching. Their sentience or sapience is beside the point. Anakin's actions are innapropriate because he exacted a massacre. Revenge is not okay (even more so for a Jedi). It doesn't matter if the Tuskens were guilty or innocent, it was the wrong thing to do. It was not self-defense. Lucas absolutely wanted us, at least in part, to reach the conclusion that the slaughter of innocents was part of this atrocity, and not just about revenge. Since Lucas is the one that wrote the dialogue for AOTC, we have Anakin saying this after he returns: With Lucas speaking through Anakin, Lucas is drawing a distinction between the men and women and children. That there might be some kind of flawed justification for killing the men, but, killing the women and children on top of that, well now we are no longer in revenge territory, now we are into the killing of innocents by association. That is evil. That is where the dark side takes you. Yes, Anakin enacting revenge on the males is not the Jedi way, however, it went past that. It went deeper than that. He killed the women and children too.. Lucas pointing that out through Anakin is supposed to illicit a response from us, the audience, that any flawed justification is gone because he did slaughter those that are innocent of the crime of killing his mother.
|
|
|
Post by Alexrd on Jan 31, 2022 20:40:05 GMT
Lucas absolutely wanted us, at least in part, to reach the conclusion that the slaughter of innocents was part of this atrocity, and not just about revenge. Since Lucas is the one that wrote the dialogue for AOTC, we have Anakin saying this after he returns: Well, of course Lucas wanted to show the depth of Anakin's actions, hence the distinction between the men (the active part) and the women/children (the passive/innocent part). My point is that Lucas wasn't saying that what Anakin did was wrong because the Tuskens are intelligent, but that what Anakin did was wrong, irrespective of wether the Tuskens were intelligent or not. Anakin was in the wrong even if he just killed only those that kidnapped and tortured Shmi. The act of revenge in and on itself was already morally wrong and Anakin went further than that by killing innocents as well, massacring the whole camp.
|
|
|
Post by mikeximus on Feb 1, 2022 20:37:00 GMT
Lucas absolutely wanted us, at least in part, to reach the conclusion that the slaughter of innocents was part of this atrocity, and not just about revenge. Since Lucas is the one that wrote the dialogue for AOTC, we have Anakin saying this after he returns: Well, of course Lucas wanted to show the depth of Anakin's actions, hence the distinction between the men (the active part) and the women/children (the passive/innocent part). My point is that Lucas wasn't saying that what Anakin did was wrong because the Tuskens are intelligent, but that what Anakin did was wrong, irrespective of wether the Tuskens were intelligent or not. Anakin was in the wrong even if he just killed only those that kidnapped and tortured Shmi. The act of revenge in and on itself was already morally wrong and Anakin went further than that by killing innocents as well, massacring the whole camp. I realize what your point was/is because you have said this: It doesn't matter if the Tuskens were guilty or innocent, it was the wrong thing to do. I disagree with this because it is clear by Anakin's dialogue, which Lucas wrote, that the issue of guilty or innocent is something important here. It is not just about revenge. It is about a terrible revenge. Why the extra descriptor by Lucas? Because this is about something more than just revenge, it is more than just going out and finding the person or persons that are guilty of the wrongdoing, it is going beyond that. That Anakin went beyond just revenge, he enacted a terrible revenge by killing the women and the children because they were innocents. The sentience (or at least level of) is also a factor. If it was a Krayt Dragon that horribly and savagely mauled Shmi to death and Anakin went out into the desert to exact his revenge on that Dragon, and in his bloodlust he killed the young dragons as well, that has no where near the same impact that killing the Tuskens, especially the women and children, has. Why? Because as Lucas shows in AOTC, the Tuskens are more than just mindless monsters, or animal predators that need to be thinned out to protect a community. That is why Anakin, even though he admits to the difference between killing the men compared to women/children, has to dehumanize the Tuskens all to way down to the levels of animals in order to justify his actions. It is the same thing he does in ROTS with the Jedi. He has to bring the Jedi all the way down to the level of being evil in order to justify his own actions, which he knows is still wrong. The Tuskens might not be on the same level of "civility" than the human settlers, but clearly Lucas wants to get across to the audience that even though the Tuskens are treacherous and dangerous, there is also more going on to the story than just them being mindless monsters or animals to be slaughtered. There is a cultural structure going on that Lucas clearly links to Native American Indians. The settlers are using the same terminology and mindset that European settlers used to describe Native American Indians. There is a clear "two sides to every story" element going on here. Yes, revenge is bad, it is not the same thing as Justice. However, this went far beyond revenge and that is why Lucas writes these scenes as he does. He shows that Anakin went beyond what might be an flawed, but understandable reaction. As I pointed out above, Lucas shows us what happens when those that are supposed to be more "civil" convince themselves that another culture is lesser or evil, or animals. Those that are more civil treat the other culture the way they convince themselves the culture as being. They make them march for hundreds of miles, they ride down entire encampments, including the women and the children. Like I said, Disney did not start the conversation about the Tuskens by linking them to the American Indian. Lucas did. I am no fan of Book of Boba Fett, so far the best episode didn't even have Boba Fett in it, but, it is clear from AOTC that it is Lucas that opens this door.
|
|
|
Post by Alexrd on Feb 2, 2022 11:44:16 GMT
I disagree with this because it is clear by Anakin's dialogue, which Lucas wrote, that the issue of guilty or innocent is something important here. It's important to show the depth of his evil actions. Lucas is not presenting killing the guilty as okay and killing the innocents as wrong. He's presenting it all as wrong, starting from killing out of revenge, which snowballed into the massacre of the entire camp, killing guilty and innocents alike.
|
|
|
Post by hernalt on Feb 8, 2022 20:56:21 GMT
Lucas' first mention of Tuskens indicates a humanoid variant.
The Star Wars – Episode One – “The Star Wars” – Second Draft Jan 28, 1975 " 30. INT. POWER STATION OFFICE – ANCHORHEAD SETTLEMENT In the shadows of the dingy little office sits a large, burly Imperial “Tusken”. His reddish eyes are sunken in a larger than normal, dust-covered face. He sits up in his chair. MECHANIC Now there’s something “out of the ordinary” for you. I wonder what they want with Lars? The gray Tusken thinks about this for a moment. TUSKEN I’d better make a report. "
IMOHO. Less is more, for a great many things, and I hope to never see anyone's proposition of what a Tusken "really" looks like, or a Jawa. This follows from Edmund Burke's On the Sublime. The impenetrable mystique of a thing is a commons, and a tragedy of the commons occurs when someone feels pressure to "contribute" to the commons by "solving" a "problem". Little do they appreciate the magic engine that drives the popularity.
|
|
|
Post by tpf1138 on Mar 1, 2022 0:20:48 GMT
The "vicious, mindless monsters" descriptor for the Tuskens always struck me as being how the 'settlers' on Tatooine thought of the Sand People, not the actual truth of who they are. As has been pointed out here, by drawing a connection, through references to 'The Searchers', between the Tuskens and America's indigenous peoples, Lucas is clearly and deliberately refuting Lars' statement.
That piece of dialogue serves a few narrative functions however. On a very basic level, it makes us fear for what has happened to Shmi. It also explains why Padme doesn't run for the hills when Anakin makes his confession to her. "Vicious, mindless monsters" is all she understands of the Tuskens. A descriptor reinforced by Shmi's brutalised remains. What she hears from Anakin therefore is that he, in effect, killed a pack of wolves, or rabid dogs, or maybe something like a nest of vampires, and is anguished about having done so in anger, and out of vengeance. The "women and children" line disrupts that slightly, but it's still only animals he's slaughtered. That point though is the crucial one, because on a deeper level it provides Anakin a ready justification with which to frame his actions. They're animals, and he "slaughtered them like animals". He will construct a similar justification, if on a grander scale, just one movie later when he insists that "the Jedi are evil".
|
|