Page 1 of 1
Was Anakin Skywalker justified in his actions?
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 11:13 pm
by DeadPoolX
Okay... I'm sure most of you have seen
Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, correct?
If you haven't and plan on seeing it, you may want to leave this thread, since there will be spoilers.
In RotS, Anakin Skywalker (later on Darth Vader) was afraid of his wife dying in childbirth, due to a Force vision of the future. He would do anything to protect her and was lured into the Dark Side of the Force by thinking it could save her. In order to gain mastery over the Dark Side, Palpatine ordered Anakin to hunt down and murder every Jedi on Corsucant.
Anakin felt his wife and unborn child were more important than the other Jedi (most of whom he didn't get along with), so he followed his new master's orders. He slaughtered the Jedi living and training there, going so far as to kill the "younglings" (who were small children) and could barely defend themselves, if at all.
We all know the rest.
So my question to all of you here: would you, in real life, do something similar, if you believed doing so would "save your spouse and child" from death? Would you kill off tons of people (most of whom could defend themselves) in order to obtain that goal? Could you, in order to finish the task, murder small children? How far would you go in order to assure the safety of your family?
Re: Was Anakin Skywalker justified in his actions?
Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 3:59 am
by Tawmis
Was he justified to murder children?
I'd have to go with no.
There is never justification to murder children.
Re: Was Anakin Skywalker justified in his actions?
Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 7:22 pm
by Datadog
I don't see "murdering children" as a stepping stone towards a "happily ever after." Even if it worked, his wife would forever hate him and his children would be in danger from everyone wanting to take revenge.
I see it as reasonable that he'd be lured to the dark side to save Amidala's life, especially after the old guy provides a nice logical argument in favor of it. But I can't see why Anakin didn't back off when the guy suddenly said "Step one: kill babies."
EDIT: Holy heck. It's fifteen minutes later. I just got home, turned on the TV, and guess what's on? DeadPool, you didn't happen to watch "Sith" on Spike earlier today, did you?
Re: Was Anakin Skywalker justified in his actions?
Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 9:23 pm
by Almirena
No.
I'd be looking for an alternative way of saving my loved ones. How could they live with themselves if I used their safety as a reason to become a monster and slaughter children?
No.
Re: Was Anakin Skywalker justified in his actions?
Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:11 pm
by Maiandra
I don't think anyone with their head on straight would believe that doing what Palpatine asked of him would save their family. Frankly, I think Anakin was very naive and more than a bit nutty to begin with. He had serious issues.
While his desire to protect Padme may have been justified to some extent, the actions he took weren't. I can't imagine she would have wanted him to do that for her either. It's one thing to protect someone if they are actively being threatened, but to proactively kill all your potential enemies before they have even done anything or given an indication of doing something is paranoid and completely out of line, to say the least. Especially when the so-called enemies are so young that there is no way to know how they'll turn out.
Re: Was Anakin Skywalker justified in his actions?
Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:27 am
by DeadPoolX
Overall, I tend to agree with the statements made here. Anakin definitely wasn't thinking straight and his actions ended with him losing his limbs and becoming "more machine than man," Padme dead and his children sent away. Perhaps if he'd thought a little more, that wouldn't have occurred.
In Anakin's defense, he had an incredibly difficult life, which may have lead to his mental instability. He was originally a slave, his mother was murdered, told he was "too old" and too much of a risk to train him as Jedi, lost his right arm (up the elbow) in a duel with Count Dooku, had to work with a secret marriage and believed his wife would die unless he did something drastic.
All of the above does not make a well-adjusted person. Even more importantly is that Padme didn't want Anakin to do any of that. She pleaded with him to "go far away" with her where they could be at peace together. Of course, he refused.
Interestingly enough, the slave who owned Anakin and the Sith who killed Qui-Gon Jinn were both aliens. Anakin and Qui-Gon were human. The Empire had numerous policies that forbid non-human lifeforms from joining the Imperial Military or even allowing them basic rights and freedoms. I wonder if Anakin's experiences had anything to do with that?
Re: Was Anakin Skywalker justified in his actions?
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:17 pm
by Tawmis
DeadPoolX wrote:
The Empire had numerous policies that forbid non-human lifeforms from joining the Imperial Military
Eh? Isn't the entire Imperial Military essentially a clone of Jango Fett (a concept I have long hated since it's introduction)?
Re: Was Anakin Skywalker justified in his actions?
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 2:39 pm
by DeadPoolX
Tawmis wrote:DeadPoolX wrote:
The Empire had numerous policies that forbid non-human lifeforms from joining the Imperial Military
Eh? Isn't the entire Imperial Military essentially a clone of Jango Fett (a concept I have long hated since it's introduction)?
Yeah. But the clones were brought in later. Up until the second trilogy, everyone -- including the writers for LucasArts -- believed stormtroopers were real non-cloned people. Makes you wonder who'd actually join to be a stormtrooper or TIE pilot, right? In either case, it seemed that one or two shots did them in.
Even including the clones, the rules forbidding non-humans were generally limited to aliens. Wookies were enslaved and have you ever seen a Rodian in the Imperial forces? I haven't.
The one alien who was in the Empire was a Chiss named Grand Admiral Thrawn. He was allowed in and kept due to him being an amazing tactical genius. Despite his intelligence, Thrawn was originally kept to the rank of Captain. Eventually, the Emperor fully recognized Thrawn's usefulness and promoted him to Rear Admiral and then Vice-Admiral. His promotion to Grand Admiral (thereby bypassing Admiral) was granted when Thawn was ordered to track down and deal with Grand Admiral Zaarin, whose fleet had rebelled.
Most of the above occurred in
TIE Fighter, a space-action flight simulator for the PC in 1994. It was still considered canon, however. The defections of Grand Admirals Harkov and Zaarin was dealt with there.
Re: Was Anakin Skywalker justified in his actions?
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:50 pm
by Tawmis
DeadPoolX wrote:
Yeah. But the clones were brought in later. Up until the second trilogy, everyone -- including the writers for LucasArts -- believed stormtroopers were real non-cloned people. Makes you wonder who'd actually join to be a stormtrooper or TIE pilot, right? In either case, it seemed that one or two shots did them in.
I hate the concept that they're clones... I really do. It takes away from all the individuality some of the Storm Troopers got through books and especially some of the RPG... As for the one shot does them in... You have to totally check out the
Injured Stormtrooper Video!