STAR WARS: EP IV 2004 REVISITED ADYWAN *1080p HD VERSION NOW IN PRODUCTION — Page 380

Definitely should have Vader igniting first. Also should have the orchestral 'Battle of the Heroes' (if at all) instead of the choir version. It's floating around the internetz somewhere. Was it in The Episode 3 Game? I can't remember...

Darth Hade said:

This is the big contradiction in the OT that nobody likes to talk about.

I'm not convinced that this is a contradiction, when you consider the particular philosophy that seems to be drawn upon in the Star Wars films. I can remember an interview with Carrie Fisher, wherein she referred to Empire as '...the spiritual one' of the initial movies, and I vaguely recall Lucas revealing his religious mind-set at the time to be of a 'Buddhist-Christian' nature (as incongruous as that might seem). Regardless, such an ideological backdrop is discernible throughout the Original Trilogy, and I've certainly always perceived strong parallels between the Jedi teachings and the maxims of Eastern philosophical traditions, particularly with regards to the Taoist concept of wu wei (and bare with me now, but this sort of jive is a certain shibboleth of mine).

Ultimately, at its foundation, wu wei (translating roughly as 'non-action' or, more precisely, 'action without action') is an effortless doing, an acting in accordance with the natural order and without disrupting life's organic process. Now, this appears very much reminiscent of feeling the force 'flow through you', of letting this energy-field that lies behind all of existence guide you, serve as your ally, while being 'calm, at peace'.

And crucially, this practice of 'non-action' (or - more appropriately - correct, undisruptive action) can be applied to confrontational happenings as well, while such a notion may seem inconsistent at first. Instead of 'rushing to face' your opponent (as Luke did with Vader in Empire), you remain still, be at one, 'use the Force', and allow what will happen to happen, as it were; Yoda himself never tells Luke that he must actively strive to seek Vader out and conquer him (and indeed chastises Luke for such a course of action in Empire), but rather serenely states in Jedi that 'face him you will' - it will be so dictated, life will conspire to have it arranged, it is the ‘will of the Force’ perhaps, and how Luke handles this event is, instead, what is central.

And then, with regards to the actual physical battle that must occur, many martial arts that inculcate the Taoist thought are concerned with using one's opponent against themselves, by allowing their rash offence to be countered and repelled back unto themselves through a clear-minded defence (via grapples, holds, blocks, and such). Conveying this approach, there is a Taoist metaphor (which, incidentally, the recent Karate Kid remake alluded to) of being still, as a puddle, so that your opponent’s attack in actual fact lands on themselves, through their image which you reflect in stillness, while you bring chaos upon yourself - send ripples across your being - if you rashly act out. I take this to be the general message behind Luke 'not needing' his weapons for the Cave. So, it is not clear to me that the ways of the Jedi (conveying peacefulness and passivity via the Eastern-aligned device of the Force) and defeating an aggressor are mutually exclusive.

And this philosophy permeates the original trilogy; I'll offer one further example from A New Hope (seeing as how the issue at play is Kenobi and Vader's duel in that particular movie). Obi-Wan having Luke cover his eyes, because they can 'deceive you', and having him instead reach out with the Force to 'see' the remote, is clearly analogous to Buddhist meditation, which concerns shutting down your sensory perceptions to look beyond the ephemeral, transient (and so, illusionary) world, to glimpse the higher realm of being; the truer reality.

It thus becomes thematically incoherent, in reference to this spiritual framework that all three films seem to operate within, to then have Obi-Wan ignite his sabre first. I fail to see any cogent reasoning to motivate such an edit.

That's a really interesting take on it. Thanks for taking the time to write such a thoughtful response!

The way I see it, Jedi always light up first.

This is why they aren't allowed to have sex.

nightstalkerpoet said:

However, I would like to say that there is a difference between hand to hand combat and fighting with a weapon, simply in the fact that your limbs are always there, prepared to be used in that defensive method. With a weapon, it is important that the person on defense actually have their weapon drawn first, so as to block the initial attack.

Point well taken. But I think the argument could be made that, given the technology of the particular weapon in question (i.e. a laser sword, capable of activating/extending - literally - at the press of a button, almost instantaneously) and the wielder of this weapon being of supranatural reflexes and ability, the necessity of having the weapon drawn is marginalised.

In Jedi, even, Luke has his sabre 'sheathed' (and again, Luke is personifying, here, this pacifistic Jedi tendency in not seeking to overtly assault Vader) but is still able to counter Vader in good time, when he lunges at Luke after commenting that 'it is unwise to lower your defences' (the aggressive Dark Side definition of foolishness, perhaps, but not the quasi-Taoist Jedi understanding - wisdom for the Jedi, as I contend, is actively not acting by drawing the lightsabre, but in fact lowering one's defences).

And even if it is more realistically acceptable that a lightsabre be activated in order to then better adopt the defensive, I would still want to say that the symbolic imagery of the Jedi standing unarmed, with the Dark Jedi bearing down on him (communicating their appositional methods and beliefs, and deepening the interpretation of the Force and the Jedi path) is too effective to be curtailed by realism.

topdawg193 said:

 

And crucially, this practice of 'non-action' (or - more appropriately - correct, undisruptive action) can be applied to confrontational happenings as well, while such a notion may seem inconsistent at first. Instead of 'rushing to face' your opponent (as Luke did with Vader in Empire), you remain still, be at one, 'use the Force', and allow what will happen to happen, as it were; Yoda himself never tells Luke that he must actively strive to seek Vader out and conquer him (and indeed chastises Luke for such a course of action in Empire), but rather serenely states in Jedi that 'face him you will' - it will be so dictated, life will conspire to have it arranged, it is the ‘will of the Force’ perhaps, and how Luke handles this event is, instead, what is central.

 

       It's interesting to consider the way it relates to Jedi prophecy.

        I recall someone who believed that Allah and the Prophet had arranged a very clever test for the obedience and submission of Muslims:

        The stones (video screens and silicon chips) and the trees (raging nations) would cry out to come kill the Jews behind them.

        Muslims are commanded to respect and learn from the People of the Book (Christians and Jews.) Allah had granted the Holy Land as a possession of the Jews. 

        Would Muslims remain obedient and take no harmful action no matter how provoked they may feel? No matter how much the deceivers incite them?

After reading through several dozens (upon dozens) of pages and other Internet sites (links), I still can't find a link to this edit via anything other than Rapidshare.

I apologize if this is the wrong place for this kind of question but, is anyone aware of a working link to a US usable file sharing site not named Rapidshare?

Thanks in advance.

-

-

Jawa eyes...they're watching you...they see your every move...

I've got a funny feeling that might be me pestering Kenny Baker for peanuts.

I will have to check my diary the next time I'm in town.

I think he did that to make The Boost happy.