What if The Prequels were based on the Pre-PT EU and were more "OT Accurate"? — Page 2

BedeHistory731 said:

I’d want to push back on that. This view is also heavily informed by modern rejection of religious institutions, colored by decades worth of abuse scandals and cults getting exposed (e.g., Scientology and the Unification Church). The “cult that captures children and brainwashes them” doesn’t seem so unreasonable after watching Jesus Camp or any numerous videos of indoctrinated fundamentalist children. The Jedi also acting as an added branch of government doesn’t help much, given how religious institutions have invested in candidates over the years. Hell, I’m not surprised Jedi molester stories aren’t more common within AO3 fanfics.

The intention may have been noble to show monastic life in a positive light, but the execution in the films has left things open to this more critical interpretation. I wouldn’t say it’s wrong at all, but rather just operating off of what has been presented in the media/real-world context. It’s a bit of that post-Catholic scandal/post-911 antitheism of which the internet has long enjoyed.

I agree with all this - it’s just bizarre that apparently George Lucas really believed he was portraying the Jedi in a positive light. The interpretation most people on the Internet seem to adhere to - that the Prequels purposely portray the Jedi as a flawed institution (like the Catholic Church or something) - is almost certainly incorrect. Multiple interviews with George Lucas reveal that he believes the Jedi and their anti-attachment philosophy was correct, and the only reason Anakin fell was because he gave in to his fear of loss.

There are also some weirdos who read Lucas’ divorce into the Jedi’s anti-attachment philosophy, which just seems really invasive. If you want Lucas’ “break-up” movie, it’s called Temple of Doom.

Channel72 said:

BedeHistory731 said:

I’d want to push back on that. This view is also heavily informed by modern rejection of religious institutions, colored by decades worth of abuse scandals and cults getting exposed (e.g., Scientology and the Unification Church). The “cult that captures children and brainwashes them” doesn’t seem so unreasonable after watching Jesus Camp or any numerous videos of indoctrinated fundamentalist children. The Jedi also acting as an added branch of government doesn’t help much, given how religious institutions have invested in candidates over the years. Hell, I’m not surprised Jedi molester stories aren’t more common within AO3 fanfics.

The intention may have been noble to show monastic life in a positive light, but the execution in the films has left things open to this more critical interpretation. I wouldn’t say it’s wrong at all, but rather just operating off of what has been presented in the media/real-world context. It’s a bit of that post-Catholic scandal/post-911 antitheism of which the internet has long enjoyed.

I agree with all this - it’s just bizarre that apparently George Lucas really believed he was portraying the Jedi in a positive light. The interpretation most people on the Internet seem to adhere to - that the Prequels purposely portray the Jedi as a flawed institution (like the Catholic Church or something) - is almost certainly incorrect. Multiple interviews with George Lucas reveal that he believes the Jedi and their anti-attachment philosophy was correct, and the only reason Anakin fell was because he gave in to his fear of loss.

I agree, with the added complication that in the context of the movies they are right. They come off looking bad to people who want to go “ooooh, not a good look” but they’re right about almost everything.

Channel72 said:
I agree with all this - it’s just bizarre that apparently George Lucas really believed he was portraying the Jedi in a positive light. The interpretation most people on the Internet seem to adhere to - that the Prequels purposely portray the Jedi as a flawed institution (like the Catholic Church or something) - is almost certainly incorrect. Multiple interviews with George Lucas reveal that he believes the Jedi and their anti-attachment philosophy was correct, and the only reason Anakin fell was because he gave in to his fear of loss.

I actually don’t think these things have to live contradictorily. Institution != the beliefs, what is taught doesn’t account for the pedagogy. Lucas believing he portrayed the Jedi as characters positively doesn’t preclude the notion that the Jedi Order as it was is cooked, especially when said Order is so pointedly entwined with a galactic government Lucas is criticizing. “Golden Age of the Jedi” is objective nomenclature that reflects status and power in a narrative indicting status and power. There is a lot more happening in what he’s talked about than the popular terms often dictated by fans in debate.

And like, Lucas can be wrong about his own work. If we were talking about real world baggage, this is its value in a fictional space that’s expanded beyond his authorial engagement.

That may be true but I think people use “death of the author” way too often to justify bad interpretations. Lucas’s intent still has a lot of weight.

In junction with what I’m saying though, it’s more like - I’m personally not a stoic buddhist, so that’s where I would disagree with Lucas’ admiration of those ideas in his work. At the very least, would be disinterested in it. If an audience is discomforted with detachment valued in that way, I do think there is space left by Lucas to feel that - you just wouldn’t be a Jedi in his world.

And again, this is where I feel like it’s always discussed so binarily - as “good” and “bad” interpretations. Flawed institutions, unwieldy pedagogy, and slavish dogma, etc. can be separate case study in the work from philosophical beliefs. It’s not contradictory for Lucas to posit those things and still come out believing Jedi are good. But could they be Good in the time/space he depicted? Exploring what can go wrong with tangible incidence, is not the same as exploring what is wrong with abstract ideas. And we always keep circling back to confusion over that messiness, when the messiness is almost the point. It’s war and politics considered over serial adventure, we’ve always known that, it comes with the territory.

But beyond that, the OT has the focused thematic answers from those questions one would be looking for anyway. Luke Skywalker has friends he cares about and succeeds through the love of a son to his father. You couldn’t be a prequel Jedi, but detachment is considered with far more balance with the whole saga in mind.

NFBisms said:

In junction with what I’m saying though, it’s more like - I’m personally not a stoic buddhist, so that’s where I would disagree with Lucas’ admiration of those ideas in his work. At the very least, would be disinterested in it. If an audience is discomforted with detachment valued in that way, I do think there is space left by Lucas to feel that - you just wouldn’t be a Jedi in his world.

And again, this is where I feel like it’s always discussed so binarily - as “good” and “bad” interpretations. Flawed institutions, unwieldy pedagogy, and slavish dogma, etc. can be separate case study in the work from philosophical beliefs. It’s not contradictory for Lucas to posit those things and still come out believing Jedi are good. But could they be Good in the time/space he depicted? Exploring what can go wrong with tangible incidence, is not the same as exploring what is wrong with abstract ideas. And we always keep circling back to confusion over that messiness, when the messiness is almost the point. It’s war and politics considered over serial adventure, we’ve always known that, it comes with the territory.

But beyond that, the OT has the focused thematic answers from those questions one would be looking for anyway. Luke Skywalker has friends he cares about and succeeds through the love of a son to his father. You couldn’t be a prequel Jedi, but detachment is considered with far more balance with the whole saga in mind.

That’s another area where people get really tripped up. You’re not supposed to be a Jedi in real life or live their whole philosophy in real life. 99%+ people in the Star Wars universe are not supposed to be Jedi. Anakin didn’t have to be a Jedi and he certainly didn’t have to stay a Jedi; if he really wanted to quit to be with Padme he could have. Most Catholics and Buddhists are not monks or nuns and it’s not a requirement for anyone to be.

And absolutely zero people in real life have the Force or the dark side (not just negative emotions, a supernatural power) to deal with. Jedi rules are directed at this very specific tiny, tiny fraction of the population with extremely important high level responsibilities and psychic powers that are heavily influenced by emotional state. People who voluntarily choose to live these rules.

This midwit thing where people think they’re too smart for the Jedi drives me nuts. The idea that the Jedi are just too dumb to understand that people have negative emotions sometimes and that that was the point of all this. No one told them all the pop psychology we have about “venting”!

You can and should relate to the concepts of delayed gratification, discipline, patience, endurance, inner contentment, etc. but that’s nowhere in the same league with the movies expecting you to become a monk.