Darth Malgus said:
Must we learn to let go? Yes, of course. But letting go doesn’t mean not caring about the people we love.
George doesn’t say that. He says the contrary. That the Jedi can love people and care about people.
In my opinion there is nothing wrong with this, and we shouldn’t suppress the fear of loss. I think it’s right, not only to be concerned about the people we love, but also to try to protect them and prevent bad things to happen to them.
It’s not about repressing your fear of loss. It’s about confronting that fear and letting it go. They’re different things. It’s about saying “Yes, I may not be in complete control, but I will do everything I can and if not, then I must let go and honor their memory by staying good”.
Also, you can’t expect a person to let go immediately. If a person we love dies in front of us, then it’s normal to be sad for a while, you can’t expect a person to see someone die in front of their eyes and a few seconds later act like nothing happened.
That’s not what happens. Obi-Wan takes plenty of time to mourn Qui-Gon. Both right after he dies and at his funeral. It’s literally never said that the Jedi have a strict time limit for how long you can mourn.
Furthermore, I think that being totally selfless, like the Jedi claim to be, is impossible. Love always requires a certain degree of possessiveness. If I love someone, I want to be with that person not only because I like him/her as a person, but also because the presence of that person makes me happy and makes me feel good. If the presence of that person didn’t make me feel good, then there would be no reason for me to engage in a romantic relationship with that person in the first place. In love, you have to give and receive. You give your love in the hope that your love will be reciprocated and that the exchange of that love will make you happy.
As I’ve said, Jedi can’t be in romantic relationships because of commitment. The Jedi are allowed to feel whatever they want, they can even have sexual experiences (Lucas says Jedi aren’t celibate), but they can’t sacrifice the greater good, the mission, to save a loved one.
Obi-Wan and Satine is an example of how a Jedi deals with romantic love right. Anakin and Padme is an example of how it’s done wrong.
Also, I don’t think that the Jedi can give lessons about what absolute love and compassion mean, since they were the first not to practice this phantom “universal love”. If they really did have unconditional love for the entire Galaxy, then they would have paid more attention to civilians and ordinary people instead of lock themselves in their own Temple and put themselves at the service of corrupt politicians, and maybe they would have cared more about the millions of people who lived in slavery and disease on Tatooine and other criminal-controlled planets. “I’m not here to free slaves”, Qui-Gon said. A great example of unconditional love for every sentient being, I must say! It’s too easy to practice “absolute love and compassion” exclusively with the people we know. And yet, this is what the Jedi do, because I don’t remember having ever seen them going out in the middle of the streets to help starving people. I mean, they didn’t even had to left Coruscant to do it, because you know, the low levels of Coruscant are already full of poor people who need help. So the Jedi should stop thinking of themselves as the custodians of absolute truth, because they’re the first to not practice what they preach.
The Jedi literally day by day participate in diplomatic missions to resolve conflicts, thus saving people in the process. Literally the opening scene of The Phantom Menace is the Jedi going to negotiate with the Trade Federation to save the people of Naboo. That’s the reason that sequence exists, to show the Jedi’s day job. The reason they don’t help the common people during the war is because they’re too busy with the war, because Palpatine drafted them into service.
But hey, look, here’s a canon example of a Jedi, Mace Windu, saving and protecting ordinary people.
Slavery only happens in the Outer Rim. The Jedi don’t have any jurisdiction there. The Senate has authority over the Jedi. The Jedi don’t have the resources to do an all out war on the Outer rim. They’d need backing by the Senate. An army. There’s only 10,000 Jedi and a shit ton of systems with slavery with millions of people. The Hutts aren’t something to laugh at. They’re literally one of the biggest powers in the galaxy. Even the Galactic Empire didn’t want war with them. They wouldn’t stand a chance because a Jedi’s biggest weakness is numbers, which is why battle droids are their perfect enemies that aren’t other force users. In the areas where they do have jurisdiction? They do free slaves. They wiped out the Zygerrian empire when they dared to do the slave trade in Republic territory. It’s not that the Jedi don’t give a shit, it’s they that don’t have the resources necessary because the Senate is greedy and selfish.
The Jedi can’t just leave the Republic. They have a responsibility to be diplomats. To save people through peaceful negotiation on a daily basis. Leaving would be devastating to the Republic. And like, it’s not like they’d be able to free all of the slaves on Tatooine without backing from the Senate, anyway. What the Jedi really should’ve done is gotten political allies in the Senate so they could change the system and make things better. When your government is shit, you don’t just ditch it, you make it better.
Qui-Gon saying “I’m not here to free slaves” is just him bluntly stating facts. That’s not why he’s there. They’re on an urgent mission, to save the Naboo. They can’t deal with slaves on Tatooine right now. They need to get to Coruscant as soon as possible. This is just another example of Lucas being a flat dialogue writer, not Qui-Gon being a dickhead. When you have a guy writing your script that writes flat dialogue, the characters are gonna say things in a very flat way that might come across as callous.
Besides, you literally have Qui-Gon try to free Shmi (when he tries to bet Watto the racing pod for both Anakin and Shmi) and Qui-Gon ask Shmi if she’s alright when Anakin has to leave. He also waits patiently as Anakin says goodbye. He’s not meant to be seen as a callous dickhead.
Nonetheless, this isn’t “George Lucas believes the Jedi shouldn’t help the common people”, it’s “The prequels are complex as shit and have a million things going on in them and because of that they don’t have time to address this stuff”.
In addition, talking about Obi-Wan as the perfect example of a person who lets go immediately is, in my opinion, wrong. Yes, Obi-Wan managed to let go immediately when Siri Tachi died, but he couldn’t let go immediately when Qui-Gon was killed. When Maul killed Qui-Gon, all Obi-Wan did was attack him aggressively and violently. I mean, this is no mystery to anyone, just review the scene of the fight between Maul and Obi-Wan. Obi-Wan was so upset and angry that he let his emotions take over, and as soon as the shield opened he immediately threw himself at Maul, attacking him. Of course, after killing him, Obi-Wan calmed down and ran to Qui-Gon to hear his last words. But in the meantime he fought Maul and killed him, driven by anger and aggressive feelings. So, I think Obi-Wan is quite hypocritical in criticizing Anakin, because he did pretty much the same, although on a smaller scale.
Obi-Wan getting angry and attacking ferociously is a character flaw in TPM. He has clear growth in all three films. Notice how he never gives into his anger in the other two movies. In fact literally his arc in AOTC is learning to go easy on Anakin, because he suffers from some of the same arrogance that Anakin does.
The Jedi have great respect for Dooku and think he could never kill anyone. That’s true. But let’s examine carefully what both Mace Windu and Ki Adi Mundi say. Ki Adi Mundi says: “He’s a politically idealist, not a murderer”. After that, Mace says: “You must know, My Lady, that Dooku was once a Jedi. He could never kill anyone, it’s not in his character”. Well, to be honest, the only thing I see in this dialogue is simply the Jedi being arrogant. Yes, they don’t think that Dooku could ever kill anyone, they don’t believe that he’s a murderer. But why do they think that? But it’s clear, because he was once a Jedi, and for God’s sake, everyone knows the Jedi are perfect, so even if one of them leaves the Order, he could never become a murderer. It’s not that the Jedi are saying those things about Dooku because they sincerely respect him and have affection for him, but simply because they have so much faith in their own teachings that they think that even if someone leaves the Order, he could never become a murderer or hurt others.
You’re just using the least charitable interpretation possible which is obviously not what Lucas intended.
If you were a cop and you had a partner who you worked with for years, he quit, and then someone years later claimed he committed a crime, you would probably use the fact that he was a cop to help make the case that it’s unlikely. Not to mention that being a Jedi is a way of life. They’re taught these things from birth. For one of their own to do something so overtly evil is unthinkable.
In addition, the statue that the Jedi have dedicated to Dooku inside the Temple is not a commemorative or appreciative statue. In the Temple library there are 20 statues, depicting the so-called Lost 20, that is, 20 Jedi masters who at some point decided to leave the Order. Dooku is part of the group of the Lost 20, and the Jedi have placed his statue in the Temple library, not to commemorate him, but simply as a warning. Further information ere: https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Lost_Twenty/Legends
That’s from Legends, not Canon. Legends was not made by George Lucas.
In said deleted scene Jocastu Nu goes on about how Dooku was so great and that it was a privilege knowing him. She compliments his statue, saying he has a powerful face. Obviously the statue is not meant to be a warning. If you read the Dooku: Jedi Lost novel (which is canon), Yoda doesn’t have any problem with Dooku leaving. He even lets him keep his lightsaber and wishes him luck. In the Obi-Wan and Anakin canon comic (takes place a couple years after TPM), Obi-Wan doesn’t have a problem with Anakin wanting to leave the order and was also willing to leave with him. Yoda doesn’t have a problem with it either, when Obi-Wan tells him about it.
“His path before coming to us… difficult. His questions natural.”
“If, after you return, Anakin still wishes to leave us, then released, he shall be. Jailers, the Jedi are not.”
Wow, what an asshole!
Again, you’re not only confusing attachment according to Lucas (a selfish obsession with holding on no matter what) with emotional connections. George Lucas writing dialogue in a flat way doesn’t mean the Jedi are actually supposed to be flat and emotionless. He’s just not a good dialogue writer. And just because George Lucas doesn’t address a bunch of stuff in his scripts doesn’t mean his intentions of what the Jedi are is invalid. Everything you’re saying that makes the Jedi morally wrong, like them not saving slaves? That’s not something that’s delved into in the prequels, you just filled in the blanks. Now, you’re supposed to do that, when watching a movie, but Lucas doesn’t delve into it enough and that leaves people coming to a conclusion that he didn’t intend, and that’s his fault. As I said in the other thread, Lucas strictly made the prequels to focus on the themes/story of letting go and how a democracy becomes a dictatorship. He constantly sticks to that bottom line. It’s why Shmi isn’t addressed except for when it comes to Anakin. The Jedi don’t free Shmi? That’s not because they’re morally wrong, it’s because Lucas doesn’t bother to address it. Because the Jedi are not the focus. You’re just supposed to take the fact that they’re good guys for granted. Shmi is there as a plot device in Anakin’s story arc. That’s it.
The only reason people have come to this uncharitable view of the Jedi Order is because George Lucas is not a good writer. Simple as that.