logo Sign In

Do the Jedi steal children?

Author
Time
Just a random thought here. To quote Qui-Gonn from Episode I (RE: Anakin), "Had he been born under the Republic we would have identified him early". What do you think this means? Is the Jedi Counsel monitoring babies all over the galaxy looking for future Jedi? And if so, do they go to the parents and say, "Sorry, we have to take him. The force is strong with him. Say good-buy". Now, that being said, do the Jedi have families? Is Obi-Wan still in touch with his parents? It doesn't seem so. So, was he taken from his parents at an early age to become a Jedi? When they get old do they not start asking question about where they are from etc.? What do you guys think?
Author
Time
Yeh. That was one of the things that didn't work out for me as well in the prequels. "Still too young he is..." *sigh*
Makes you wonder what they actually did to those who weren't "identified earlier". D;
Author
Time
I think they require parental consent, but will take a child they believe to be orphaned.

Check out this official "news article" from the HoloNet News site:
http://www.holonetnews.com/52/jediwatch/13418_1.html

You know of the rebellion against the Empire?

Author
Time
One of the comics pretty much explained this. When they find a baby, and I mean an infant, that is strong in the Force, they convince the parents that the child will probably lead a better life among the Jedi. The children are not taken by force. Anyway, once they've been taken, they're trained in the ways of the Jedi with no further contact allowed to their parents. This is to prevent attachments so they don't freak out and go all dark side like Anakin did if their parents are killed or just die.

I believe it's also discussed in a novel somewhere. Essentially, they don't usually train anybody older than a year or so. 6 months and younger are preferred.

I did read an interesting message on this over at TFN years ago before AOTC came out. Since Jedi aren't allowed to marry or have children, the "Jedi gene" should die out. If Lucas had left it as an ability that could be learned, everything would be fine. But since it seems to be genetic, Jedi would basically make themselves go extinct since there's no way to pass on that genetic code.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Erikstormtrooper
I think they require parental consent, but will take a child they believe to be orphaned.


I wonder how many parents had convenient accidents after their children were "identified."

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Whoa, you really buy into the whole "the Jedi are evil" thing don't you? What happened the the good ol' black and white good versus evil nature of Star Wars? There was nothing from any of the movies to say the Jedi would be anything like that. Considering the relatively small number of Jedi, and the vastness of the galaxy, I suppose it works out well to assume the majority of parents refuse. I guess this could also be used to explain why the Jedi gene doesn't die out, since there are a vast number of potential force users in the galaxy who have not been trained. Anyway, I still thing the Jedi gene this is a dumb idea, and it is even dumber that the Jedi somehow scan the galaxy for potential force users and send letters or make personal visits to their to convince them their baby would live a "better" life if they were to be donated to their monastic order and never see any of their family again. Stupid.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Here's a theory I have. Take it or not.
First, it seemed to me the Jedi child thing was based on a throw away line from Yoda in Empire. I took it from that as Yoda baiting Luke to try harder. The PT says I was wrong. So whatever.

Now even if it was intended from the begining by the great and powerful Lucas, then I see this whole Jedi taking children under their care as a sub conscience mirror to his own life as a father by adopting his kids.
George has made a saga that in affect says to kids --to his kids, --that the greatest, most trusted guardians of the galaxy are the ones who don't have natural parents raising them. And the only way to be great Jedi is if you're adopted by the Jedi, --or the Lucas,--then you too can change the ways of the simple minded.

And let's not forget that one of the kids had a cameo as a Jedi youngling.

We've analyzed their attack, sir, and there is a danger.
Author
Time
It wasn't thought all the way through, and doesn't mesh with the OT as a result. Had the films been made in chronlogical order, it would have made more sense for Ben to raise (and train) Luke by himself on Tatooine instead of waiting twenty years in the shadows, and letting Luke bond with Owen and Beru. You don't put Luke in the same scenario as the padawan whose training you botched! Yoda could have raised Leia on Dagobah instead of putting her in potential peril of crossing paths with Palpatine and Vader too soon. Not that either one ever picks up Force vibes from the young Senator from Alderaan.
Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
Originally posted by: SilverWook
It wasn't thought all the way through, and doesn't mesh with the OT as a result. Had the films been made in chronlogical order, it would have made more sense for Ben to raise (and train) Luke by himself on Tatooine instead of waiting twenty years in the shadows, and letting Luke bond with Owen and Beru. You don't put Luke in the same scenario as the padawan whose training you botched! Yoda could have raised Leia on Dagobah instead of putting her in potential peril of crossing paths with Palpatine and Vader too soon. Not that either one ever picks up Force vibes from the young Senator from Alderaan.


Those are really good points. We all know that George Lucas had an extremely different idea for Jedi training back when he wrote the original Star Wars. I wish he could have remained faithful to a lot of his ideas instead of tossing them aside so casually. While sometimes a dramatically new and fresh idea can be very compelling (like Darth Vader being Luke's father), going too far with that sort of approach can make a work of art too divided and messy. An artist needs to be faithful to his original vision or risk losing all focus. The irony is how George has been claiming to support his original vision as an excuse for his work to destroy the actual, cohesive vision that is realized in the films.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
It just yet another PT snafu to make the Jedi deseve to be killed; and it adds to the internal disparagement of Obi-Wan
Author
Time
Originally posted by: lordjedi
One of the comics pretty much explained this. When they find a baby, and I mean an infant, that is strong in the Force, they convince the parents that the child will probably lead a better life among the Jedi. The children are not taken by force.


When you're a state-sanctioned warrior monk with a weapon at his side, trained in "aggressive negotiation," and capable of influencing people's minds ... yeah, they pretty much used force, or the implicit threat of force, to take those children*. Or they just paid the parents off. Either way, the idea of toddlers being raised by cloistered fanatical religious warriors is almost as offensive to me as Jar-Jar Binks.

Meesa rewrite Jedi training as thinly-veiled allegory of Taliban-funded madrassahs? Uh-oh!

* In addition to the obvious threat of physical violence, we also see the potential for constructive force (misuse of authority, pressure), Force-based powers of manipulation and deceit, or even outright kidnapping. Were such actions sanctioned by the Coruscanti Jedi cult and done for the "greater good," individual Jedi kidnappers would probably view their actions as service to the "Light Side" of the Force. Given the massive disparity in power between the Galactic citizen and the Jedi Order, as well as the unresponsiveness of the Galactic government, it is likely that the Jedi acquired their child-slaves with near impunity.
"It's the stoned movie you don't have to be stoned for." -- Tom Shales on Star Wars
Scruffy's gonna die the way he lived.
Author
Time
I love the faith we have in mankind. And by mankind of course I mean the good guys in a work of science fiction. Must we add a darkside to everything? I don't think that is what Georgie had intended with the training them from a young age thing. There is really no reason to infer any of this based on anything from any of the prequels (holy crap! Did I just defend the PT?). As far as the fanatical religious order goes, if there was a religion that allowed people to shoot lightning from their figures and to be able to nearly fly, I think I would be interested in becoming a fanatic myself. If you had such damning evidence that a religion is without a doubt real, why not dedicate your child to that order. Especially if you were going to have them aborted anyway, or if the parents were poor and knew they couldn't give the child a very decent life. Keven J. Anderson (as cheesy of a writer as he often is) had a much more believeable setup with Luke's Jedi Academy. There they begin in their early teen years, and they get to go home and visit their parents or their parents come to visit them. Very much like a boarding school. Even in that case Luke had to search out force initiate people, because not every one could be a Jedi, and recruit them or talk their parents into sending them there. Which is much more reasonable when it does not mean that they are never going to see them again. The first time I saw episode I and they said Anakin was too old to begin the training I thought it was retarded. Especially since Obi-Wan said to Yoda "Was I much younger when you taught me?" in reference to Luke. So, it seems every famous jedi that become heroes in SW films actually begin training much older. If you are taught in your late teens/early twenties, like Ben or Luke, you come out fine. But if your training begins when you are around nine or so, you're doomed to the dark side... you see, that is why you cannot reconcile the OT with the PT. Just doesn't work. I wish ol George would go the extra mile and remake episodes IV, V and VI with all new actors, special effect, cheesy dialogue and all, and continue the story and just disregard the OT.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Scruffy
Meesa rewrite Jedi training as thinly-veiled allegory of Taliban-funded madrassahs? Uh-oh!

ROFL, Scruffy! Perfect!


Originally posted by: C3PX
I wish ol George would go the extra mile and remake episodes IV, V and VI with all new actors, special effect, cheesy dialogue and all, and continue the story and just disregard the OT.


I don't think we're that lucky and I don't think the OT is either.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Originally posted by: C3PX
I love the faith we have in mankind. And by mankind of course I mean the good guys in a work of science fiction. Must we add a darkside to everything?


Ask George. He's the one who decided the Jedi were a cultic monastic order whose members took children from their parents[a], trained them to use weapons from a very young age, denied them human relationships with other people[c], ran their organization on the basis of a faulty interpretation of a prophecy[d], sought to spy on and assassinate political leaders without due process[e], denied the sapience of other beings that developed culture and used human language[f], and generally made fools of themselves.

Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon were trained from very young childhood, and they turned out okay, except for misreading the prophecy and creating Vader. Anakin was trained from childhood, and he ended up slaughtering the Jedi and enabling the murder of billions under the Empire. Luke was trained as an adult, and he managed to convert Darth Vader to the Light Side -- something the remaining Jedi Masters believed could not be done -- and withstood the temptations of Darth Sidious.

I ask you, what moral do you draw from this? The moral I draw from this -- and I give George Lucas all due credit putting something of meaning in the PT that actually makes the OT look better -- the moral I draw is that the Jedi failed because they denied young children the freedom of conscience/thought and militarized them at a young age. Luke flourished as a Jedi because he had developed a solid moral and ethical footing before embarking, of his own free and informed will, on the Jedi path. Although I have not studied Mr. Lucas's politics, I believe he is generally liberal, and the moral I have derived is in accord with liberal principles, as well as certain left-wing beliefs about the roles of military and religion in contemporary American society.

[a] TPM
AOTC
[c] AOTC
[d] PT, passim
[e] ROTS
[f] TPM
"It's the stoned movie you don't have to be stoned for." -- Tom Shales on Star Wars
Scruffy's gonna die the way he lived.
Author
Time
Wow, that post had footnotes and stuff.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Scruffy
Originally posted by: C3PX
I love the faith we have in mankind. And by mankind of course I mean the good guys in a work of science fiction. Must we add a darkside to everything?


Ask George. He's the one who decided the Jedi were a cultic monastic order whose members took children from their parents[a], trained them to use weapons from a very young age, denied them human relationships with other people[c], ran their organization on the basis of a faulty interpretation of a prophecy[d], sought to spy on and assassinate political leaders without due process[e], denied the sapience of other beings that developed culture and used human language[f], and generally made fools of themselves.

Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon were trained from very young childhood, and they turned out okay, except for misreading the prophecy and creating Vader. Anakin was trained from childhood, and he ended up slaughtering the Jedi and enabling the murder of billions under the Empire. Luke was trained as an adult, and he managed to convert Darth Vader to the Light Side -- something the remaining Jedi Masters believed could not be done -- and withstood the temptations of Darth Sidious.

I ask you, what moral do you draw from this? The moral I draw from this -- and I give George Lucas all due credit putting something of meaning in the PT that actually makes the OT look better -- the moral I draw is that the Jedi failed because they denied young children the freedom of conscience/thought and militarized them at a young age. Luke flourished as a Jedi because he had developed a solid moral and ethical footing before embarking, of his own free and informed will, on the Jedi path. Although I have not studied Mr. Lucas's politics, I believe he is generally liberal, and the moral I have derived is in accord with liberal principles, as well as certain left-wing beliefs about the roles of military and religion in contemporary American society.

[a] TPM
AOTC
[c] AOTC
[d] PT, passim
[e] ROTS
[f] TPM


*clears throat* Dude, WTF? I think you're projecting a little bit here. Let's look at it a little differently. For thousands of years this went on with no trouble. Then, a whiney little brat that couldn't stand authority decided to break the rules because he was the "chosen one" (make no mistake, he was the chosen one, I sure didn't see Luke killing Palpatine).

When did Luke embark on his Jedi training with an informed will. "Darth Vader killed your father, now we need to train you in the ways of the Jedi so you can bring him to justice." Two movies later "Oh, well, I meant that your father became Darth Vader, not that he really killed him". That doesn't really sound informed to me. Sure, he went about it of his own free will, but only because he had nothing else keeping him where he was, what with Beru and Owen being dead.

Qui-Gon didn't misread the prophecy. The prophecy was plain and simple "One will be born of the Force that will bring balance to the Force" What it doesn't say is how that individual will bring about the balance. If anything, in his rush to assume he'd found the one (he had) he didn't think to ask that question. Sure enough, Anakin brought balance, but he did a lot of bad stuff in between.

Spying on and assassinating government officials without due process? Did we watch the same movie? Helloooooo! The Emperor was evil dark side incarnate. He deserved to die without "due process". Mace said it perfectly "He owns the courts". To bad the spoiled brat wouldn't listen.

How does any of this jive with far left tendencies? Isn't the left all about reducing the military and keeping religion out of everything except churches, mosques, etc?

Seriously, from the comics we know that they go to families, talk to them, and convince them that their child would be better off raised as a Jedi. They don't use force and they don't use mind tricks. There's no guess work here.

The main reason Luke allows those types of things to go on has less to do with Anakin and much more to do with Kyp Durron. You see, the PT didn't exist when those books were written and most of the records were destroyed during the Jedi purge. So Luke went with what he knew. When Kyp went all dark side, Luke decided that isolation was probably not a bad thing. In fact, since he himself got through his training with emotional attachments, he thought it would be a good thing. So you see, that really had nothing to do with what happened in the PT and a whole lot to do with what happened in the OT.

To answer the question at the beginning of the post, I don't draw any morals from the PT because they're crap and have such a huge mishmash of ideas that it's impossible to draw anything from them.

And FYI, the ability to speak does not in fact make one intelligent
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
To touch on the religion aspect, I don't think Scruffy was saying that the Jedi religion or organization was inherently evil, but that perhaps the Jedi order had become too stagnant, dogmatic, and militant by the time of the republic's fall (according to the PT at least). In other words, from a particular point of view you could really make them all sound very corrupt.

Though I will say that I don't believe George was purposely formulating that lesson to the detail that Scruffy describes. I think he had some basics ideas as he wrote out the story and sort of ended up with some basic lessons that work in accordance with his currently-adopted, anti-war, supposedly-Buddhist beliefs. Most of the particulars that Scuffy mentioned were therefore unintentional.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Originally posted by: 20th Century Mark
And if so, do they go to the parents and say, "Sorry, we have to take him. The force is strong with him. Say good-buy".

Taking a child for free probably is indeed considered a good buy.
I am fluent in over six million forms of procrastination.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Forbidden Zone
Now even if it was intended from the begining by the great and powerful Lucas, then I see this whole Jedi taking children under their care as a sub conscience mirror to his own life as a father by adopting his kids.
George has made a saga that in affect says to kids --to his kids, --that the greatest, most trusted guardians of the galaxy are the ones who don't have natural parents raising them. And the only way to be great Jedi is if you're adopted by the Jedi, --or the Lucas,--then you too can change the ways of the simple minded.


This, to me if it were true, would be the single sickest message that Lucas has ever sent. It makes you wonder if he really meant it that way or not. Since it's only a theory, all we can ever do is speculate.

F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
"When you're a state-sanctioned warrior monk with a weapon at his side, trained in "aggressive negotiation," and capable of influencing people's minds ... yeah, they pretty much used force, or the implicit threat of force, to take those children*. Or they just paid the parents off. Either way, the idea of toddlers being raised by cloistered fanatical religious warriors is almost as offensive to me as Jar-Jar Binks."

It wouldn't even require that. Just think - people know what the Jedi are capable of. Would you, as a non-Force-user, feel comfortable trying to discipline a young Force user? Just think of what could happen to you. I wouldn't be surprised if some of those parents were throwing their children at the Jedi!

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
Originally posted by: ADigitalMan
Originally posted by: 20th Century Mark
And if so, do they go to the parents and say, "Sorry, we have to take him. The force is strong with him. Say good-buy".

Taking a child for free probably is indeed considered a good buy.



LOL That made me laugh!

Maybe the Jedi "produce" there own babies and keep the "strong" ones.
Author
Time
Maybe the Jedi "produce" there own babies and keep the "strong" ones.


If anyone turns this into a "Palpatine created Anakin" debate, I'll kill'em!

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
Well, I think Palpatine DID create Anakin. It makes perfect sense actually. One day Palps was visiting his buddy Jabba, and he saw this hot chick and impregnated her with the force in some kinky kind of way. Many years later when he meets Anakin (circa. 1999) he realizes that it is his son, and that is why he says "I will be watching your career with great interest." Makes perfect sense.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Originally posted by: MeBeJedi

If anyone turns this into a "Palpatine created Anakin" debate, I'll kill'em!


*cackle* "Goooood, use your agressive feelings. Let the hate flow through you." >; )

Author
Time
Oh God; Palpatine being Anakin's father is just unacceptable for me. If we want to discuss Anakin's father, I'd say it could be Darth Palegius, NOT the emperor.