- Post
- #162979
- Topic
- The legendary "Starkiller Ranch" Thread
- Link
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/162979/action/topic#162979
- Time
Originally posted by: THX
At the risk of flogging a dead horse...
Indeed-- but I am fascinated by this point personally...
"Successful in protecting him" from what? Obi Wan is made two dimensional by this explanation. There's nothing but convenience and justification in this explanation. And that's appropriate because Ben's not basing his choice of words on his feelings or on statistical evidence -- his choice of words is based on how the story was conceived WHEN VADER WAS NOT HIS FATHER. ESB changes that and makes us reevaluate what he says and how that scene plays. Now it plays that he has guarded Luke for his whole life and meditated on the Force. He meets Luke after Luke gets a message from Leia. He has a choice then to either treat Luke like an adult or to lie. He lies. He lies and it gains him nothing. And he never explains why he does it. If he's been shadowing Luke all his life, a three-dimensional Obi Wan would have some kind of accurate appraisal of what kind of man Luke is.
Ben felt responsible for Anakin's downfall and didn't want to be responsible for potentially leading Luke the same way. Maybe he was wrong to say what he did, but that doesn't mean it was out of character. After all, he'd been charged with watching over Luke specifically to keep him from Vader. Leia's message and it's consequences forced him to tell Luke more than he originally intended, and in the circumstances he would naturally be reticent to divulge all the secrets he'd been keeping for so many years.
Anyway, that's the way I see it.
At the risk of flogging a dead horse...
Indeed-- but I am fascinated by this point personally...
Hopefully, Obi-Wan is not a two-dimensional character. Whether his words to Luke were successful in protecting him or not has nothing to do with whether he would say them or not. At the time of their conversation, Luke had not yet blown up "the fu*king Death Star" and Ben couldn't use that as a judge of what he could or couldn't handle. Most murderers don't have supernatural powers. Even so, wards who are in a position to keep their children in the dark about their parent's wrongdoing often do so. Ben wasn't basing his choice of words on statistical evidence, but on his own feelings, right or wrong.
"Successful in protecting him" from what? Obi Wan is made two dimensional by this explanation. There's nothing but convenience and justification in this explanation. And that's appropriate because Ben's not basing his choice of words on his feelings or on statistical evidence -- his choice of words is based on how the story was conceived WHEN VADER WAS NOT HIS FATHER. ESB changes that and makes us reevaluate what he says and how that scene plays. Now it plays that he has guarded Luke for his whole life and meditated on the Force. He meets Luke after Luke gets a message from Leia. He has a choice then to either treat Luke like an adult or to lie. He lies. He lies and it gains him nothing. And he never explains why he does it. If he's been shadowing Luke all his life, a three-dimensional Obi Wan would have some kind of accurate appraisal of what kind of man Luke is.
Ben felt responsible for Anakin's downfall and didn't want to be responsible for potentially leading Luke the same way. Maybe he was wrong to say what he did, but that doesn't mean it was out of character. After all, he'd been charged with watching over Luke specifically to keep him from Vader. Leia's message and it's consequences forced him to tell Luke more than he originally intended, and in the circumstances he would naturally be reticent to divulge all the secrets he'd been keeping for so many years.
Anyway, that's the way I see it.
What logic is there to this notion that telling Luke the truth will lead him down the dark side of his father? If there were any danger of Luke following his father's footsteps then special care to make sure he adjusts to the truth is the obvious and wise way to bring him up. Some day, presumably, he will have to face Vader. To set him up for a big fall, to set all his training on a bedrock of lies is stupid and foolish. Luke was never going to go to the dark side -- there was no way, until Vader makes his big reveal and shatters all Luke's confidence. Who's fault is that?
Obi Wan is an honorable, wise and heroic Jedi. If he lies to Luke and it gains him nothing, has no reason behind it, and leads him to give mealy mouthed excuses for it later -- it changes his character. It is not out of character for the "wet noodle" Obi Wan of the OT as is. It is out of character for the heroic Obi Wan of Star Wars '77 -- and the PT Obi Wan as well. There's nothing to indicate what you suggest-- he uses Leia's message as an excuse to tell Luke things he has long wanted to tell him, but which Owen prevented. As originally written, he's been itching to tell Luke these things for years -- I don't see how that's been changed. It's just the meaning of what he tells him and how a big piece of it is now a lie that's changed.
What's "natural" about choosing to tell Luke a giant lie? Being uncomfortable about the truth is natural. Telling a giant lie is a concscious choice which a Jedi would only make if it served a greater good. It has to serve a purpose. In the OT as is, it serves only the purpose of setting Luke up for a big fall.
Without a reason, the lie is a convenient bit of nonsense. If a reason were provided, such as I've suggested before, then the lie could be made understandable.