logo Sign In

Why no mention of "Sith" in Episodes IV-VI?

Author
Date
Author
Time
Post link
Hey, new to the site and sorry if this question has been asked before. I did a quick search and couldn't find anything, not used to this forum software.

I've wondered since I saw the first prequel why there was no mention of Sith in episodes IV-VI. Was this something Lucas thought up after the original trilogy? As well as the rules, such as "there can be only two"? Seems strange that such an important and fundamental structure of the antagonistic element was never mentioned...
Author
Time
Post link
I've also always wondered this. Also, why doesn't anyone say the word Padawan? I mean, like... I would expect it to come up at least ONCE in the OT... Like, maybe Obi-Wan would say it to Luke or Darth Vader to Obi-Wan or Yoda to Luke or SOMETHING!

I think this is just more proof that George Lucas didn't have the PT written way back when he first made the OT... Also, what the hell was he doing in that, like, 20 year break or whatever between the OT and the PT? I mean, he obviously wasn't writtin the PT, or else there wouldn't be so many plot holes and inconsistencies!
Author
Time
Post link
Well, he likely invented new terms for old relationships, or as he would so gracefully say, "my vision expanded."
Author
Time
Post link
There were several books, trading cards, and other sources that referred to Vader as a Dark Lord of the Sith at least as far back as 1980. It just never came up in dialogue.
Author
Time
Post link
Yes, Sith was a term that was almost always (if not always) part of the Star Wars lexicon. It just didn't appear in the movies. Padawan... is a term that I really can't stand and wish hadn't been introduced to said lexicon. Apprentice just sounds so much cooler and more serious. It's not an original word, but it works. Padawan just sounds like some amphibious creature related to a frog. Younglings is even worse. Death to that word!

But, ahem, back on topic. Darth Vader was always known as "Dark Lord of the Sith." Padawan was just something that popped up in the prequels. Younglings was only okay when Yoda said it because I figured it was some sort of Yoda speech, but when other characters started saying it... bad things happened.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Jaster Mareel
I've also always wondered this. Also, why doesn't anyone say the word Padawan? I mean, like... I would expect it to come up at least ONCE in the OT... Like, maybe Obi-Wan would say it to Luke or Darth Vader to Obi-Wan or Yoda to Luke or SOMETHING!

I think this is just more proof that George Lucas didn't have the PT written way back when he first made the OT... Also, what the hell was he doing in that, like, 20 year break or whatever between the OT and the PT? I mean, he obviously wasn't writtin the PT, or else there wouldn't be so many plot holes and inconsistencies!


After Jedi he got divorced and, his ex got 24 million in the settlement. So, he had to build up that money again.

I think the reason Padawan doesn't show up in the OT is becuase, it's not usefull anymore. The Sith don't use it. Obiwan and, Yoda haven't called anyone Padawan since the old days(not only that but, there trying to fit as, much training as, possible in for Luke. Not waist time making him study ranks).
Though, the "rule of two" can easily be arguable that it doesn't apply at all(in the PT or, the OT). Why? Well, only Yoda says anything about it and, it's not brought up again. If I recall correctly Greivous said that he was trained by Dooku. Why would Sidious allow that training to go on if that was a rule? In the OT they're both trying to turn Luke to the Dark Side. Why are they trying to do that if there was a "rule of two"? Why not just kill him? I understand that Vader was his father but, Sidious has no attachment to Luke at all.


http://twister111.tumblr.com
Previous Signature preservation link

Author
Time
Post link
I know "Lord of the Sith" was used in the original comic book adaptation, so it had to be in the script or other Lucasfilm material Marvel used for reference.

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Hellspawn
Hey, new to the site and sorry if this question has been asked before. I did a quick search and couldn't find anything, not used to this forum software.

I've wondered since I saw the first prequel why there was no mention of Sith in episodes IV-VI. Was this something Lucas thought up after the original trilogy? As well as the rules, such as "there can be only two"? Seems strange that such an important and fundamental structure of the antagonistic element was never mentioned...


Plot holes, my friend. They're all over the place.

Or perhaps George Lucas has alzheimers and it simply hasn't been officially confirmed.
I'd like a qui-gon jinn please with an Obi-Wan to go.

Red heads ROCK. Blondes do not rock. Nuff said.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v72/greencapt/hansolovsindy.jpg
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Ell the Ewok
There are only ever 2 Sith, and grevious wasnt counted as a sith, he was trained the Jedi arts but that dosnt make him a jedi. Also why would Yoda or Obi wan say like 'yes my young padawan' when Luke knows nothing of padawanship?


Ther are thounsands of Sith in the distant past. There are exactly four shown in the movies, (Grevious only counts as a Dark Jedi) and there are five Lords mentioned, if you count Darth Plagus.

(Maul, Vader, Tyranus, Sidious, and Plagus are the only G-Canon Sith Lords)

4

Author
Time
Post link
As already mentioned, "Sith" is an old concept. Vader is referred to as a Dark Lord of the Sith in the novel among other places. The "Knights of the Sith" appear in the first rough draft written in 1974. The character of Darth Vader becomes a "Black Knight of the Sith" in the second draft in 1975 before finally ending up a "Dark Lord of the Sith" in the third draft.

The term "padawan" has even older origins. It appears in the very first line of Lucas' original story treatment from 1973 along with the name Mace Windu.

But I believe the two Sith rule is strictly a prequel concept.
Greedo shoots first? Not in my DVD player.
Author
Time
Post link
There were references of Vader being the Dark Lord of the Sith back in the OT times, but there was no real meaning there. It was merely a title. There wasn't really the concept of the Sith being antagonists to the Jedi. Once again, GL made up as he went along (which I call the "Whose line is it anyway" script writting style).
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
I remember Vader being called a Sith in old SW novels (those based on the OT), but how about the Emperor? Can you find me a quote where he is referred as "Sith Master" or something?
I saw the original theatrical release of the Old Trilogy on the big screen and I'm proud of it...
How did I accomplish that (considering my age) is my secret...
Author
Time
Post link
According to the ANH novel the emperor was a basically good guy who was pushed aside and isolated by crafty politicians. Definitely not a sith master.

Unless misinformation was all part of his plan...

War does not make one great.

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Yoda Is Your Father
Unless misinformation was all part of his plan...


Reminds me of the profets scene in Life of Brian: "Oh, you said you didn't know! He's making up as he goes along!"


... unless misinformation was part of GL's plan all the time.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
Interesting thing about the original SW novel is a passage where Vader seems conflicted over the destruction of Alderaan. What did Alan Dean Foster know about Vader's backstory, and when did he know it?

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
Post link
I read somewhere on the Behind the Magic CD there is a scene mentioned where Vader tell Tarkin they shouldn't destory Alderaan without consulting the Emperor. A shame it was not included in the film, if true.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Commander Courage
I read somewhere on the Behind the Magic CD there is a scene mentioned where Vader tell Tarkin they shouldn't destory Alderaan without consulting the Emperor. A shame it was not included in the film, if true.


It was in the radio drama
Author
Time
Post link
Yeah. Palps is only mentioned in ANH, very briefly at that. But him giving word to terminate Alderaan would have made him seem truly in charged.

Also, anybody else notice that a LOT of stuff that's G-Canon now was never really mentioned in the OT movies?

Palpatine's name, the planet Tatooine (it was called that in the novel and appeared in the ROTJ Crawl, but I don't believe it was actually spoken until Episode One), Lords of the Sith, Coruscant. And the names of quite a few minor characters as well...

4

Author
Time
Post link
Actually, Luke said the word Tatooine at the end of Empire. As in, "I'll meet you at the rendezvous point on... Tatooine."

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Jaster Mareel
...just more proof that George Lucas didn't have the PT written way back when he first made the OT...or else there wouldn't be so many plot holes and inconsistencies!


Bingo.
Forum Moderator
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Anchorhead
Quote
Originally posted by: Jaster Mareel
...just more proof that George Lucas didn't have the PT written way back when he first made the OT...or else there wouldn't be so many plot holes and inconsistencies!


Bingo.


Lucas has made no secret that he never had the PT written way back then, so I don't see your point?!?!

He had a very rough outline to the story...VERY ROUGH!!!!!!

http://www.facebook.com/DirtyWookie