in continuation of my previous Pre-PT EU threads:
Before The Prequels were made, what the Jedi were supposed to be like? Was there meant to be a Jedi temple? Where did the Jedi Knights reside? Their clothing? Were they allowed to marry?
I feel like there are some other threads around that had information on this. Though perhaps it was through comics depicting war against Mandalore or ancient Sith or whatever. Unless by “supposed to” do you mean old George ideas?
They were decentralized and could go wherever adventure took them, though they were generally assigned to watch over specific areas. They still had large meetings sometimes or lived in more organized societies on planets like Ossus. Masters could have multiple apprentices. They could have girlfriends/boyfriends, spouses, and children, and there were even Jedi dynasties that were passed down many generations. They could join up with political causes and fight in wars that they thought were important, like with the reunification of the Empress Teta system or the Clone Wars. Related to this, they often worked for specific monarchs and nobles like Empress Teta or Bail Organa, a lot like… hmm… knights. They could wear whatever they wanted and often had very distinctive costumes.
In short they were the opposite of the prequel Jedi in almost every way, and it was much better. More creative, interesting, and varied stories were more possible.
Most of this is from the Tales of the Jedi comics and post-ROTJ books, as I’m sure you know.
I know when ROTJ was being made, Lucas intended Luke’s black outfit to be the standard Jedi uniform (at least in style, if not necessarily colour). Also Children of the Jedi implies that Jedi masters specifically wore black cloaks. So this led me to believe prequel-era Jedi were distinguished by rank by their regalia.
Jedi apprentice: simple double-breasted black jumpsuit.
Jedi knight: jumpsuit + tunic w. tabard
Jedi master: jumpsuit + robe w. tabard + cloak (a black version of Luke’s TFA outfit essentially)
“The Anarchists are right in everything; in the negation of the existing order and in the assertion that, without Authority there could not be worse violence than that of Authority under existing conditions. They are mistaken only in thinking that anarchy can be instituted by a violent revolution… There can be only one permanent revolution — a moral one: the regeneration of the inner man. How is this revolution to take place? Nobody knows how it will take place in humanity, but every man feels it clearly in himself. And yet in our world everybody thinks of changing humanity, and nobody thinks of changing himself.”
― Leo Tolstoy
In short they were the opposite of the prequel Jedi in almost every way, and it was much better. More creative, interesting, and varied stories were more possible.
I absolutely agree. As much as I like the Prequels, I think that the lore surrounding the Force and the Jedi was much better before they existed. The individual Jedi were free to have romantic relationships, the Order as a whole was more competent, and weird and ambiguous concepts like the balance of the Force and the Chosen One prophecy did not exist. It was much more creative and interesting, as you say.
Hell, the only reason Lucas introduced the “no marriage rule” for the Jedi is because he wanted Anakin and Padmé’s love story in Attack of the Clones to be a reminiscence of Romeo and Juliet’s Love story: a forbidden love story between two people that shouldn’t be in love. In The Phantom Menace itself there is no indication whatsoever that the Jedi are not supposed to have romantic relationships. If Lucas hadn’t become obsessed with the idea of having a forbidden love, we might have had a more tolerable Jedi Order even in the Prequel Trilogy we actually got in real life, and Anakin’s motivations for turning to the Dark Side might have even remained the same, without any need for the “no marriage rule” to be introduced. Because let’s be real, it’s not necessary to have a version of the Jedi Order that completely forbids marriage to try to convey the message that selfish and possessive love is not good. Even a lot of married people will tell you that selfish and possessive love is not a good thing.
Also, Lucas always said that the Jedi did basically nothing wrong during the Prequel era, and has always openly advocated for the idea that the fall of the Jedi Order was caused exclusively by Palpatine’s manipulations and Anakin’s selfishness, which led him to fall to the Dark Side and betray the Jedi. Therefore, we don’t need the Jedi Order to be less relatable to explain its fall, because even Lucas himself doesn’t see things that way. If anything, portraying the Jedi of the Prequel era more similarly to the Jedi of the Tales of the Jedi comics and the New Jedi Order series would have helped to better convey the message that Lucas was trying to convey, that the Jedi have no responsibility for Anakin’s fall. The Jedi Order of the Prequel era has a lot of questionable rules, which makes it very difficult for the viewers not to partially blame them for what happened with Anakin (which makes sense if you consider how they were written in the Prequel Trilogy we got). But without these rules, it would have been even more clear that the fall of the Jedi and the fall of the Republic were all Palpatine and Anakin’s fault as Lucas intended.
«No one is guilty of being born a slave. But the slave to whom not only aspirations for freedom are alien, but who justifies and paints his slavery in rosy colors, such a slave is a lackey and a brute who arouses a legitimate sense of indignation, disgust and repugnance.»
— Vladimir Lenin
Hell, the only reason Lucas introduced the “no marriage rule” for the Jedi is because he wanted Anakin and Padmé’s love story in Attack of the Clones to be a reminiscence of Romeo and Juliet’s Love story: a forbidden love story between two people that shouldn’t be in love. In The Phantom Menace itself there is no indication whatsoever that the Jedi are not supposed to have romantic relationships.
I agree with pretty much everything you wrote. I just wonder if Lucas had already conceived of the Jedi as celibate even during The Phantom Menace. TPM doesn’t explicitly mention the no marriage rule, but it’s clear that by the time Lucas wrote TPM, he was already developing ideas about a very weird “anti-attachment” pseudo-Buddhist philosophy for the Jedi, because the script emphasizes how the Jedi get very fussy about 10 year old Anakin’s attachment to his mother. Even at this early stage in the Prequels, it’s clear that Lucas’ vision for the Jedi and their anti-attachment philosophy is already at odds with mainstream sensibilities. Like, it seems absurd to the average audience member that the Jedi are so averse to emotional attachments that they fear a 10 year old being attached to his mom. This already suggests the Jedi are some fucked up cult that kidnaps infants before they can even form emotional attachments. So the “no romantic attachments” rule in AoTC seemed like a natural extension of what TPM set up. But yeah, it’s very likely that Lucas’ desire to shoehorn in some Romeo & Juliet was the motivating factor here, but this also feels like a natural extension of the “no attachment” stuff in TPM.
God I hate the Romeo and Juliet angle, he didn’t even get it right! It would make way more sense for the wealthy Amidala’s to look down on the poor former slave, and have drama as a result. Jedi teachings suddenly being monastic is just too weird and creeps into too many other aspects of the story.
In short they were the opposite of the prequel Jedi in almost every way, and it was much better. More creative, interesting, and varied stories were more possible.
I absolutely agree. As much as I like the Prequels, I think that the lore surrounding the Force and the Jedi was much better before they existed. The individual Jedi were free to have romantic relationships, the Order as a whole was more competent, and weird and ambiguous concepts like the balance of the Force and the Chosen One prophecy did not exist. It was much more creative and interesting, as you say.
Hell, the only reason Lucas introduced the “no marriage rule” for the Jedi is because he wanted Anakin and Padmé’s love story in Attack of the Clones to be a reminiscence of Romeo and Juliet’s Love story: a forbidden love story between two people that shouldn’t be in love. In The Phantom Menace itself there is no indication whatsoever that the Jedi are not supposed to have romantic relationships. If Lucas hadn’t become obsessed with the idea of having a forbidden love, we might have had a more tolerable Jedi Order even in the Prequel Trilogy we actually got in real life, and Anakin’s motivations for turning to the Dark Side might have even remained the same, without any need for the “no marriage rule” to be introduced. Because let’s be real, it’s not necessary to have a version of the Jedi Order that completely forbids marriage to try to convey the message that selfish and possessive love is not good. Even a lot of married people will tell you that selfish and possessive love is not a good thing.
Also, Lucas always said that the Jedi did basically nothing wrong during the Prequel era, and has always openly advocated for the idea that the fall of the Jedi Order was caused exclusively by Palpatine’s manipulations and Anakin’s selfishness, which led him to fall to the Dark Side and betray the Jedi. Therefore, we don’t need the Jedi Order to be less relatable to explain its fall, because even Lucas himself doesn’t see things that way. If anything, portraying the Jedi of the Prequel era more similarly to the Jedi of the Tales of the Jedi comics and the New Jedi Order series would have helped to better convey the message that Lucas was trying to convey, that the Jedi have no responsibility for Anakin’s fall. The Jedi Order of the Prequel era has a lot of questionable rules, which makes it very difficult for the viewers not to partially blame them for what happened with Anakin (which makes sense if you consider how they were written in the Prequel Trilogy we got). But without these rules, it would have been even more clear that the fall of the Jedi and the fall of the Republic were all Palpatine and Anakin’s fault as Lucas intended.
100%
I’m glad someone else is on the same page lol
Hell, the only reason Lucas introduced the “no marriage rule” for the Jedi is because he wanted Anakin and Padmé’s love story in Attack of the Clones to be a reminiscence of Romeo and Juliet’s Love story: a forbidden love story between two people that shouldn’t be in love. In The Phantom Menace itself there is no indication whatsoever that the Jedi are not supposed to have romantic relationships.
I agree with pretty much everything you wrote. I just wonder if Lucas had already conceived of the Jedi as celibate even during The Phantom Menace. TPM doesn’t explicitly mention the no marriage rule, but it’s clear that by the time Lucas wrote TPM, he was already developing ideas about a very weird “anti-attachment” pseudo-Buddhist philosophy for the Jedi, because the script emphasizes how the Jedi get very fussy about 10 year old Anakin’s attachment to his mother. Even at this early stage in the Prequels, it’s clear that Lucas’ vision for the Jedi and their anti-attachment philosophy is already at odds with mainstream sensibilities. Like, it seems absurd to the average audience member that the Jedi are so averse to emotional attachments that they fear a 10 year old being attached to his mom. This already suggests the Jedi are some fucked up cult that kidnaps infants before they can even form emotional attachments. So the “no romantic attachments” rule in AoTC seemed like a natural extension of what TPM set up. But yeah, it’s very likely that Lucas’ desire to shoehorn in some Romeo & Juliet was the motivating factor here, but this also feels like a natural extension of the “no attachment” stuff in TPM.
I don’t think it’s the same thing. They’re using it as a point to convey that he will need to master his negative emotions like fear if he’s going to be a Jedi. They turn him down for training, not just because they’re worried he’ll turn to the dark side, but also for his benefit. If they just hated the idea that people have families and wanted powerful Force users no matter what, they would have whisked him away no questions asked. They trained him because Qui Gon pushed it on them and on Obi Wan especially.
As much as I dislike how they’re portrayed in the prequels, this is a common misconception people have. There’s this idea of “oh, how ironic, they were religious zealots who believed in this messiah figure, this is like Jesus coming and he’s actually the devil.” No, not really. The only person who believes in the chosen one idea fully is Qui Gon. Everyone else expresses a lot of skepticism, rightfully so.
They never kidnap anyone. They have the parents’ permission. It is a philosophical issue, like you could say, well, the kid didn’t consent to be raised as a Jedi. But no kids ever consent to being born into whatever family or culture they’re in anyway.
Even as late as 1999 and 2000, maybe 2001 there are comics that have a Jedi couple in the prequel era. I don’t know a lot about it but one of them is a tree lady. It started with Attack of the Clones.
Maybe beside the point of this thread, but all of the Tales of the Jedi stuff is still implied to be true of the Jedi at one point in the galaxy’s history.
Hell, Master Odan-Urr from those comics is basically who writes the modern Jedi Code in new canon, (his discovered annotations, at least). The mural in Palpatine’s office (ROTS) depicts The Great Hyperspace War. Even pre-1999, the TOTJ comics themselves begin to hint at the direction of things when Nomi, Sylvar, and Tott basically become bureaucrats after The Sith War.
I don’t keep up with High Republic stuff really, but of the stuff I have (Jedi Survivor, The Acolyte, and Dooku: Jedi Lost), a big friction in those is going from a looser Jedi mandate to the inevitable tie to the Senate and a heavier handed High Council. Even in the prequels themselves (and granted, this is gleaned from Jedi Lost context), Dooku at the start of AOTC is still [unofficially] considered one of their number despite having endeavors counter to the Jedi’s code and official political affiliations.
Granted, it’s a lot of writers making stuff work or having their own interpretations, but a lot of the “dogmatic” read on the prequel Jedi has to date been contextualized as not as strict as it may seem to a tortured-for-other-reasons Anakin Skywalker. Yoda is forgiving Jedi for having children or gambling problems constantly. What are the consequences, really, of breaking the rules? The code is just a guide, an ideal aspiration.
not a Jedi apologist or a Jedi hater but a secret third thing
Maybe beside the point of this thread, but all of the Tales of the Jedi stuff is still implied to be true of the Jedi at one point in the galaxy’s history.
Hell, Master Odan-Urr from those comics is basically who writes the modern Jedi Code in new canon, (his discovered annotations, at least). The mural in Palpatine’s office (ROTS) depicts The Great Hyperspace War. Even pre-1999, the TOTJ comics themselves begin to hint at the direction of things when Nomi, Sylvar, and Tott basically become bureaucrats after The Sith War.
You get the feeling that the ancient Jedi, and the galaxy in general, are a lot more exotic and weird, if only because when you’re doing comics you have an unlimited “effects budget” compared to film and you can create any visual designs you want. The aliens, ships, planets, and force powers are definitely bigger and crazier than the movies.
However the structural stuff of the Jedi, as far as masters with multiple apprentices, decentralization, Jedi with lovers, families, and children, a lack of a standard uniform, etc. are all consistent with how the Jedi were portrayed in everything else (mainly post-ROTJ material because that was what we had) up until the prequels came out. After that, KOTOR retconned the 4000 BBY time period as way more pared down and similar to the movies in terms of portrayal and visual design.
I’m not saying you CAN’T reduce it to just one time period of history, I’m saying you SHOULDN’T because it’s very limiting in terms of stories you can tell. I know you know this already, but it’s an out of universe change which is why we emphasize pre-1999 (real life) not pre-4000 BBY or pre-1000 BBY or something.
I don’t know what you’re talking about with the bureaucrat thing.
I’m not saying you CAN’T reduce it to just one time period of history, I’m saying you SHOULDN’T because it’s very limiting in terms of stories you can tell. I know you know this already, but it’s an out of universe change which is why we emphasize pre-1999 (real life) not pre-4000 BBY or pre-1000 BBY or something.
In my opinion, the prequelization of the Jedi and Sith orders should have happened only after the Russan Reformation in 1000 BBY. Darth Bane should have been the first Sith to use the Darth title, and he should have been the one who introduced the “only red lightsabers for the Sith” rule, as well as the Sith aesthetics from the Prequels in general. The same goes for the Jedi. They should have become a centralized and bureaucratized order that forbids romantic relationships and takes infants only after the Russan Reformation. Every Old Republic story that takes place prior to 1000 BBY should have seen a Jedi Order more similar to the one from the Tales of the Jedi comics, and a Sith Order without Darths and red lightsabers.
«No one is guilty of being born a slave. But the slave to whom not only aspirations for freedom are alien, but who justifies and paints his slavery in rosy colors, such a slave is a lackey and a brute who arouses a legitimate sense of indignation, disgust and repugnance.»
— Vladimir Lenin
Vladius said:
However the structural stuff of the Jedi, as far as masters with multiple apprentices, decentralization, Jedi with lovers, families, and children, a lack of a standard uniform, etc. are all consistent with how the Jedi were portrayed in everything else (mainly post-ROTJ material because that was what we had) up until the prequels came out. After that, KOTOR retconned the 4000 BBY time period as way more pared down and similar to the movies in terms of portrayal and visual design.
Right, all I’m saying is that some of the the current direction has been reconciling, at the very least making room for, TOTJ-like Jedi as historical.
Jedi Survivor’s whole High Republic subplot has a lot of the same elements, for example. Dagan Gera and Santari Khri’s outfits are not standardized, they have autonomy to explore, build, and recruit throughout the galaxy for their own project (Tanalorr) that is largely unencumbered by oversight. The High Republic Jedi are also generally much less strict on attachments, to the point that romance and basically-marriages are common.
I think a lot of it gets hamstrung by its proximity to, and the desire to “explain”, the prequels (see: The Acolyte) - but The High Republic gets as close to the old understanding of the Jedi as it can before being obligated to fit into and set up the prequels’ state of play.
Ultimately doesn’t mean anything, but the fundamentalism of the prequel Jedi has been retconned into a particular period.
I’m not saying you CAN’T reduce it to just one time period of history, I’m saying you SHOULDN’T because it’s very limiting in terms of stories you can tell. I know you know this already, but it’s an out of universe change which is why we emphasize pre-1999 (real life) not pre-4000 BBY or pre-1000 BBY or something.
Sure. I don’t disagree. Obviously I’ve expressed liking what emerges from the prequels, but I think it does have its limits. At the very least, a bunch of things to write around. I’ve hit diminishing returns on it after Acolyte, for sure.
I don’t know what you’re talking about with the bureaucrat thing.
Granted, it’s like right up to the 1999 line (late '98), but - Redemption. Nomi’s administrative obligations [as a Republic representative] to the conclave rebuilding the Order basically pre-creates Andor’s whole Mon and Leida Mothma bit between her and Vima, (which pushes Vima to seek out Ulic). Nomi, Tott, and Sylvar get into political squabbling about whether Ulic should be tried for his war crimes. They have diplomatic roles on Ryloth and Cathar.
It feels closer to the roles of the prequel Jedi (more than the Dudes Rock™ of the Qel-Droma boys in the preceding titles), even if it’s all predicated on Jedi having children or being widowers.
not a Jedi apologist or a Jedi hater but a secret third thing
Even as late as 1999 and 2000, maybe 2001 there are comics that have a Jedi couple in the prequel era. I don’t know a lot about it but one of them is a tree lady. It started with Attack of the Clones.
That’d be Tholme, Quinlan Vos’ master, and T’ra Saa. They were both created in the interregnum between TPM & AOTC. An interesting period of the EU, as it’s basically a transitional form between the pre-&-post-1999 EU. They went as far as to make Ki-Adi-Mundi polygamous with multiple children.
“The Anarchists are right in everything; in the negation of the existing order and in the assertion that, without Authority there could not be worse violence than that of Authority under existing conditions. They are mistaken only in thinking that anarchy can be instituted by a violent revolution… There can be only one permanent revolution — a moral one: the regeneration of the inner man. How is this revolution to take place? Nobody knows how it will take place in humanity, but every man feels it clearly in himself. And yet in our world everybody thinks of changing humanity, and nobody thinks of changing himself.”
― Leo Tolstoy
Granted, it’s like right up to the 1999 line (late '98), but - Redemption. Nomi’s administrative obligations [as a Republic representative] to the conclave rebuilding the Order basically pre-creates Andor’s whole Mon and Leida Mothma bit between her and Vima, (which pushes Vima to seek out Ulic). Nomi, Tott, and Sylvar get into political squabbling about whether Ulic should be tried for his war crimes. They have diplomatic roles on Ryloth and Cathar.
It feels closer to the roles of the prequel Jedi (more than the Dudes Rock™ of the Qel-Droma boys in the preceding titles), even if it’s all predicated on Jedi having children or being widowers.
I definitely got the sense when reading Redemption that KJA intended the aftermath of the Great Sith War the moment in time when the decentralized Jedi Order of the previous TOTJ arcs began transitioning into the centralized Jedi Order of the prequels. I think Nomi even makes a remark about creating a permanent Jedi Council. But true to form, later EU contradicts this, anachronistically making the Jedi Council a thing prior to the Sith War.
I personally don’t mind the Jedi of the prequel era being more centralized, hierarchical, and legalistic than the ancient Jedi. As someone who has a deep interest in early Christianity and its evolution, I enjoy the parallels. I also believe this makes Luke’s restoration of the Jedi all the more poignant, as he’s not merely bringing back the Jedi Order, but restoring it to a purer form absent the ossified traditions which contributed to its downfall. But I do mind the dogmatic Jedi being the rule rather than the exception throughout time, like what we see now in the Disney canon.
“The Anarchists are right in everything; in the negation of the existing order and in the assertion that, without Authority there could not be worse violence than that of Authority under existing conditions. They are mistaken only in thinking that anarchy can be instituted by a violent revolution… There can be only one permanent revolution — a moral one: the regeneration of the inner man. How is this revolution to take place? Nobody knows how it will take place in humanity, but every man feels it clearly in himself. And yet in our world everybody thinks of changing humanity, and nobody thinks of changing himself.”
― Leo Tolstoy
I personally don’t mind the Jedi of the prequel era being more centralized, hierarchical, and legalistic than the ancient Jedi. As someone who has a deep interest in early Christianity and its evolution, I enjoy the parallels. I also believe this makes Luke’s restoration of the Jedi all the more poignant, as he’s not merely bringing back the Jedi Order, but restoring it to a purer form absent the ossified traditions which contributed to its downfall. But I do mind the dogmatic Jedi being the rule rather than the exception throughout time, like what we see now in the Disney canon.
I agree wholeheartedly.
«No one is guilty of being born a slave. But the slave to whom not only aspirations for freedom are alien, but who justifies and paints his slavery in rosy colors, such a slave is a lackey and a brute who arouses a legitimate sense of indignation, disgust and repugnance.»
— Vladimir Lenin
Vladius said:
However the structural stuff of the Jedi, as far as masters with multiple apprentices, decentralization, Jedi with lovers, families, and children, a lack of a standard uniform, etc. are all consistent with how the Jedi were portrayed in everything else (mainly post-ROTJ material because that was what we had) up until the prequels came out. After that, KOTOR retconned the 4000 BBY time period as way more pared down and similar to the movies in terms of portrayal and visual design.Right, all I’m saying is that some of the the current direction has been reconciling, at the very least making room for, TOTJ-like Jedi as historical.
Jedi Survivor’s whole High Republic subplot has a lot of the same elements, for example. Dagan Gera and Santari Khri’s outfits are not standardized, they have autonomy to explore, build, and recruit throughout the galaxy for their own project (Tanalorr) that is largely unencumbered by oversight. The High Republic Jedi are also generally much less strict on attachments, to the point that romance and basically-marriages are common.
I think a lot of it gets hamstrung by its proximity to, and the desire to “explain”, the prequels (see: The Acolyte) - but The High Republic gets as close to the old understanding of the Jedi as it can before being obligated to fit into and set up the prequels’ state of play.
Ultimately doesn’t mean anything, but the fundamentalism of the prequel Jedi has been retconned into a particular period.
I’m not saying you CAN’T reduce it to just one time period of history, I’m saying you SHOULDN’T because it’s very limiting in terms of stories you can tell. I know you know this already, but it’s an out of universe change which is why we emphasize pre-1999 (real life) not pre-4000 BBY or pre-1000 BBY or something.
Sure. I don’t disagree. Obviously I’ve expressed liking what emerges from the prequels, but I think it does have its limits. At the very least, a bunch of things to write around. I’ve hit diminishing returns on it after Acolyte, for sure.
I don’t know what you’re talking about with the bureaucrat thing.
Granted, it’s like right up to the 1999 line (late '98), but - Redemption. Nomi’s administrative obligations [as a Republic representative] to the conclave rebuilding the Order basically pre-creates Andor’s whole Mon and Leida Mothma bit between her and Vima, (which pushes Vima to seek out Ulic). Nomi, Tott, and Sylvar get into political squabbling about whether Ulic should be tried for his war crimes. They have diplomatic roles on Ryloth and Cathar.
It feels closer to the roles of the prequel Jedi (more than the Dudes Rock™ of the Qel-Droma boys in the preceding titles), even if it’s all predicated on Jedi having children or being widowers.
It was retconned into a particular period the moment the prequels came out. That isn’t a new development and it’s not something I’ll give Disney credit for, assuming I thought it was a positive thing.
Reading through it again, that section literally proves all my points. They say that they haven’t had a conclave in over a decade, and the whole fact that they have to call conclaves together in the first place just shows how decentralized they are. All the conflict is coming from interpersonal, personal, romantic, and family drama and each character expresses their personality, opinions, and ideas very differently. The “diplomatic roles” are for their own native planets, not assignments to another part of the galaxy from a centralized authority. Also Jedi were always diplomats and people that resolved disputes as individuals. (When C’baoth is trying to get Luke on his side in the Thrawn books, he sets up a perverse version of it to demonstrate Jedi superiority to him.) That isn’t “political squabbling,” it’s a legitimate difference in opinion on what to do about Ulic, which is both an important topic on the galactic scale and something that affects them very personally.
This is exactly what I’m talking about. You can have a story like that with personal stakes because the characters have personal stakes in each other, including romantic and family ties. None of them are anything close to “bureaucrats” except for Nomi having to do the paperwork to set up the convocation.
Granted, it’s like right up to the 1999 line (late '98), but - Redemption. Nomi’s administrative obligations [as a Republic representative] to the conclave rebuilding the Order basically pre-creates Andor’s whole Mon and Leida Mothma bit between her and Vima, (which pushes Vima to seek out Ulic). Nomi, Tott, and Sylvar get into political squabbling about whether Ulic should be tried for his war crimes. They have diplomatic roles on Ryloth and Cathar.
It feels closer to the roles of the prequel Jedi (more than the Dudes Rock™ of the Qel-Droma boys in the preceding titles), even if it’s all predicated on Jedi having children or being widowers.
I definitely got the sense when reading Redemption that KJA intended the aftermath of the Great Sith War the moment in time when the decentralized Jedi Order of the previous TOTJ arcs began transitioning into the centralized Jedi Order of the prequels. I think Nomi even makes a remark about creating a permanent Jedi Council. But true to form, later EU contradicts this, anachronistically making the Jedi Council a thing prior to the Sith War.
I personally don’t mind the Jedi of the prequel era being more centralized, hierarchical, and legalistic than the ancient Jedi. As someone who has a deep interest in early Christianity and its evolution, I enjoy the parallels. I also believe this makes Luke’s restoration of the Jedi all the more poignant, as he’s not merely bringing back the Jedi Order, but restoring it to a purer form absent the ossified traditions which contributed to its downfall. But I do mind the dogmatic Jedi being the rule rather than the exception throughout time, like what we see now in the Disney canon.
I don’t think that’s what he intended at all, and if he did, that just proves my point further that the prequels are what changed everything.
I do mind because it makes the movies considerably worse.
Hell, the only reason Lucas introduced the “no marriage rule” for the Jedi is because he wanted Anakin and Padmé’s love story in Attack of the Clones to be a reminiscence of Romeo and Juliet’s Love story: a forbidden love story between two people that shouldn’t be in love. In The Phantom Menace itself there is no indication whatsoever that the Jedi are not supposed to have romantic relationships.
I agree with pretty much everything you wrote. I just wonder if Lucas had already conceived of the Jedi as celibate even during The Phantom Menace. TPM doesn’t explicitly mention the no marriage rule, but it’s clear that by the time Lucas wrote TPM, he was already developing ideas about a very weird “anti-attachment” pseudo-Buddhist philosophy for the Jedi, because the script emphasizes how the Jedi get very fussy about 10 year old Anakin’s attachment to his mother. Even at this early stage in the Prequels, it’s clear that Lucas’ vision for the Jedi and their anti-attachment philosophy is already at odds with mainstream sensibilities. Like, it seems absurd to the average audience member that the Jedi are so averse to emotional attachments that they fear a 10 year old being attached to his mom. This already suggests the Jedi are some fucked up cult that kidnaps infants before they can even form emotional attachments. So the “no romantic attachments” rule in AoTC seemed like a natural extension of what TPM set up. But yeah, it’s very likely that Lucas’ desire to shoehorn in some Romeo & Juliet was the motivating factor here, but this also feels like a natural extension of the “no attachment” stuff in TPM.
I don’t think it’s the same thing. They’re using it as a point to convey that he will need to master his negative emotions like fear if he’s going to be a Jedi. They turn him down for training, not just because they’re worried he’ll turn to the dark side, but also for his benefit. If they just hated the idea that people have families and wanted powerful Force users no matter what, they would have whisked him away no questions asked. They trained him because Qui Gon pushed it on them and on Obi Wan especially.
As much as I dislike how they’re portrayed in the prequels, this is a common misconception people have. There’s this idea of “oh, how ironic, they were religious zealots who believed in this messiah figure, this is like Jesus coming and he’s actually the devil.” No, not really. The only person who believes in the chosen one idea fully is Qui Gon. Everyone else expresses a lot of skepticism, rightfully so.
They never kidnap anyone. They have the parents’ permission. It is a philosophical issue, like you could say, well, the kid didn’t consent to be raised as a Jedi. But no kids ever consent to being born into whatever family or culture they’re in anyway.
Even as late as 1999 and 2000, maybe 2001 there are comics that have a Jedi couple in the prequel era. I don’t know a lot about it but one of them is a tree lady. It started with Attack of the Clones.
You might be right. I wouldn’t be surprised though if Lucas already was strongly considering the Jedi to be celibate, even during the writing/production of TPM. I mean they look like freakin’ Franciscan monks. I know that imagery is explainable independently as derivative of Obi Wan’s desert robe in the Original Trilogy (and wasn’t even the original concept design for the TPM Jedi uniform), but it’s also yet another component that serendipitously suggests the idea of celibacy. None of the Jedi in TPM are shown to be married either, which, granted, is an “argument from silence” - perhaps there was simply no relevant occasion to show any married Jedi or bring up the subject. But again, I’m making a cumulative case here. Lucas famously never liked the idea of Luke marrying Mara Jade either. According to Timothy Zahn, as early as 1993/94 Lucasfilm rejected the idea of Luke getting married. But ultimately, after some convincing, Lucas allowed Luke to get married, or at least didn’t bother to veto the idea. But according to J.W. Rinzler, Lucas never really liked the idea. It’s likely that George Lucas’ feelings about this were initially limited to Luke specifically and not the whole Jedi order, but I suspect his feelings about Luke played an important role in shaping later ideas about the Jedi Order as an institution.
As for the 1999/2000 EU comics, there’s no guarantee any of that was in sync with George Lucas’ latest ideas. Maybe Lucas was toying with the idea in TPM, but wasn’t sure about it until some time after those comics were approved for publication. Maybe Lucas was too busy developing the Prequels to micromanage the EU at the time. The point is, a lot of elements in TPM serendipitously support the “no romantic attachments” rule from AoTC. Whether this was planned or not at the time TPM was written is uncertain, but there’s enough in TPM to make me suspect Lucas was at least headed in that direction. At least, the idea doesn’t seem to have popped up out of thin air in AoTC from a completely ad hoc need to add in a forbidden romance subplot. There’s clearly some indication of a precedent here (even if it was just a vague uneasiness Lucas had about Jedi marriage) that supported the subplot beyond the immediate needs of the script at the time.
Also, I understand the Jedi don’t actually kidnap children. But nothing in the movie explains how the recruitment process is supposed to work normally. All we know is that 10 year old Anakin is “too old” and the Jedi fear that his (completely normal) attachment to his mother could be a major problem down the road. The audience is thus left to fill in the blanks about how the Jedi recruit young children as new Padawans. It’s understandable that some people would read cult-like vibes into all this, given how real-world cults try to discourage outside attachments among members.
Finally, the Jedi are initially skeptical that little Anakin is the Chosen One, but they seem to accept that it’s at least a strong possibility, especially given the contemporaneous re-emergence of the Sith. At the end of TPM, Yoda says to Obi-Wan something like (paraphrasing) “The Chosen One he may be, but I still don’t like you training him, even though the Council approved it”. By the time of RoTS, Yoda seems to accept that the Chosen One prophecy applies to Anakin, but worries that the prophecy might have been misinterpreted. But I agree that the Prequels don’t really lend themselves well to an “ironic false Messiah” narrative like Dune. In interviews, Lucas flat out says the Chosen One prophecy is true, and Anakin fulfills it in ROTJ by killing Palpatine. So Vader is not really a “false Messiah” so much as a round-about, circuitous and misunderstood Messiah. He’s more like the ironic result of wishing for a Messiah using a monkey’s paw or something, i.e. you get exactly what you wished for, but it sucks in unexpected ways.
Hell, the only reason Lucas introduced the “no marriage rule” for the Jedi is because he wanted Anakin and Padmé’s love story in Attack of the Clones to be a reminiscence of Romeo and Juliet’s Love story: a forbidden love story between two people that shouldn’t be in love. In The Phantom Menace itself there is no indication whatsoever that the Jedi are not supposed to have romantic relationships.
I agree with pretty much everything you wrote. I just wonder if Lucas had already conceived of the Jedi as celibate even during The Phantom Menace. TPM doesn’t explicitly mention the no marriage rule, but it’s clear that by the time Lucas wrote TPM, he was already developing ideas about a very weird “anti-attachment” pseudo-Buddhist philosophy for the Jedi, because the script emphasizes how the Jedi get very fussy about 10 year old Anakin’s attachment to his mother. Even at this early stage in the Prequels, it’s clear that Lucas’ vision for the Jedi and their anti-attachment philosophy is already at odds with mainstream sensibilities. Like, it seems absurd to the average audience member that the Jedi are so averse to emotional attachments that they fear a 10 year old being attached to his mom. This already suggests the Jedi are some fucked up cult that kidnaps infants before they can even form emotional attachments. So the “no romantic attachments” rule in AoTC seemed like a natural extension of what TPM set up. But yeah, it’s very likely that Lucas’ desire to shoehorn in some Romeo & Juliet was the motivating factor here, but this also feels like a natural extension of the “no attachment” stuff in TPM.
I don’t think it’s the same thing. They’re using it as a point to convey that he will need to master his negative emotions like fear if he’s going to be a Jedi. They turn him down for training, not just because they’re worried he’ll turn to the dark side, but also for his benefit. If they just hated the idea that people have families and wanted powerful Force users no matter what, they would have whisked him away no questions asked. They trained him because Qui Gon pushed it on them and on Obi Wan especially.
As much as I dislike how they’re portrayed in the prequels, this is a common misconception people have. There’s this idea of “oh, how ironic, they were religious zealots who believed in this messiah figure, this is like Jesus coming and he’s actually the devil.” No, not really. The only person who believes in the chosen one idea fully is Qui Gon. Everyone else expresses a lot of skepticism, rightfully so.
They never kidnap anyone. They have the parents’ permission. It is a philosophical issue, like you could say, well, the kid didn’t consent to be raised as a Jedi. But no kids ever consent to being born into whatever family or culture they’re in anyway.
Even as late as 1999 and 2000, maybe 2001 there are comics that have a Jedi couple in the prequel era. I don’t know a lot about it but one of them is a tree lady. It started with Attack of the Clones.
You might be right. I wouldn’t be surprised though if Lucas already was strongly considering the Jedi to be celibate, even during the writing/production of TPM. I mean they look like freakin’ Franciscan monks. I know that imagery is explainable independently as derivative of Obi Wan’s desert robe in the Original Trilogy (and wasn’t even the original concept design for the TPM Jedi uniform), but it’s also yet another component that serendipitously suggests the idea of celibacy. None of the Jedi in TPM are shown to be married either, which, granted, is an “argument from silence” - perhaps there was simply no relevant occasion to show any married Jedi or bring up the subject. But again, I’m making a cumulative case here. Lucas famously never liked the idea of Luke marrying Mara Jade either. According to Timothy Zahn, as early as 1993/94 Lucasfilm rejected the idea of Luke getting married. But ultimately, after some convincing, Lucas allowed Luke to get married, or at least didn’t bother to veto the idea. But according to J.W. Rinzler, Lucas never really liked the idea. It’s likely that George Lucas’ feelings about this were initially limited to Luke specifically and not the whole Jedi order, but I suspect his feelings about Luke played an important role in shaping later ideas about the Jedi Order as an institution.
As for the 1999/2000 EU comics, there’s no guarantee any of that was in sync with George Lucas’ latest ideas. Maybe Lucas was toying with the idea in TPM, but wasn’t sure about it until some time after those comics were approved for publication. Maybe Lucas was too busy developing the Prequels to micromanage the EU at the time. The point is, a lot of elements in TPM serendipitously support the “no romantic attachments” rule from AoTC. Whether this was planned or not at the time TPM was written is uncertain, but there’s enough in TPM to make me suspect Lucas was at least headed in that direction. At least, the idea doesn’t seem to have popped up out of thin air in AoTC from a completely ad hoc need to add in a forbidden romance subplot. There’s clearly some indication of a precedent here (even if it was just a vague uneasiness Lucas had about Jedi marriage) that supported the subplot beyond the immediate needs of the script at the time.
Also, I understand the Jedi don’t actually kidnap children. But nothing in the movie explains how the recruitment process is supposed to work normally. All we know is that 10 year old Anakin is “too old” and the Jedi fear that his (completely normal) attachment to his mother could be a major problem down the road. The audience is thus left to fill in the blanks about how the Jedi recruit young children as new Padawans. It’s understandable that some people would read cult-like vibes into all this, given how real-world cults try to discourage outside attachments among members.
Finally, the Jedi are initially skeptical that little Anakin is the Chosen One, but they seem to accept that it’s at least a strong possibility, especially given the contemporaneous re-emergence of the Sith. At the end of TPM, Yoda says to Obi-Wan something like (paraphrasing) “The Chosen One he may be, but I still don’t like you training him, even though the Council approved it”. By the time of RoTS, Yoda seems to accept that the Chosen One prophecy applies to Anakin, but worries that the prophecy might have been misinterpreted. But I agree that the Prequels don’t really lend themselves well to an “ironic false Messiah” narrative like Dune. In interviews, Lucas flat out says the Chosen One prophecy is true, and Anakin fulfills it in ROTJ by killing Palpatine. So Vader is not really a “false Messiah” so much as a round-about, circuitous and misunderstood Messiah. He’s more like the ironic result of wishing for a Messiah using a monkey’s paw or something, i.e. you get exactly what you wished for, but it sucks in unexpected ways.
I still disagree but I think we would have to look at the details of AotC drafts to see exactly when the idea cropped up.
I wonder if Luke not getting married is more of a personal preference for the character on an aesthetic level. There are a lot of higher-ups who didn’t like the idea of Spider-Man getting married, for example, and in the 2000s they famously wrote an awful story where he makes a literal deal with the devil to erase his marriage (so that his elderly aunt who is permanently on death’s door anyway will live a little longer.) From this perspective, his youthfulness and singleness is considered such an essential part of the character that he just shouldn’t get married for story reasons. Stan Lee approved of this. I could see something similar with Luke since he’s such a youthful character. Or maybe it’s a weird artifact of Lucas’s own divorce. Who knows.
That could have been an early indication of a celibacy thing but I don’t think so. Lucas approved of plenty of other EU projects that had Jedi with families.
I would say people really overstate the premise with Dune as well but that’s another story lol
They should be depicted as they were in the TALES OF THE JEDI comics from the pre-prequel era, not some weird child taking, sexless, anti emotional assholes who are blind to the obvious. They were a mix of crusaders with monks and could marry and have families.