The Jedi/Luke Romance Debate

[godisawesome]

Thought this was a pair of topics each with an interesting discussion to have, but that there was enough of an overlap and likelihood for tangent they might fit in the same thread:

- Does Luke work better with a capacity for romance, marriage, and raising a family, like in Legends? Or was that always incongruous with his characterization and archetype, and he “should” remain single, like the Disney canon?

- Should the PT-era Jedi celibacy aspect be viewed as “correct orthodoxy” in-universe, or an outdated idea from a too-dogmatic Order in-universe? How much should future creators respect or honor the idea?

I’ll make no bones about the fact that I tend to prefer my fictional characters to be both able to marry, and to eventually act on it; I have no respect for anything about One More Day in Spider-Man, and thought the New 52’s attempt to break up marriages across the board was incredibly stupid. And yeah, I was a fan of Luke and Mara Jade, even though I didn’t think it was perfect. I also tend to think that the celibacy idea was created by Lucas to serve an internal-conflict point in AOTC rather than as an intrinsic, inescapable truth of being a Jedi… and my own personal history as a Protestant Christian means that my view of the celibacy idea is one of philosophical rejection.

What’s your guys’ ideas on these things?

[Immortal Weapon]

Jedi are suppose to be monks, right? When thinking about them from a religious angle the celibacy makes sense. Of course there are of the stories of whenever a Jedi fell in love it was easier for them to fall to the influence of the dark side.

I think they should be able to hook up. Not being able to is going against one nature and I can't support that.

[Username taken]

I don't personally have a problem with the warrior monk thing. I'm not also not against them getting married either.In debates like these, I always defer to the creator- what did Lucas want?

He wrote the Jedi as "monks" that are trained from very early childhood into becoming warriors (that should in theory prevent them from developing more "physical" desires). Lucas kind of based the Jedi on Eastern religion so he patterned the Jedi after Buddhist Monks who are celibate. It must be noted that Japanese Buddhist Monks can get married unlike the others (if I recall correctly).

I think it's something that could be worked with. Since there's supposed to be new Jedi (i'm not really sure because Disney's trilogy provided no sense of closure on this topic), they could expand the celibacy requirement into something optional for the Jedi.

[godisawesome]

Jedi are suppose to be monks, right? When thinking about them from a religious angle the celibacy makes sense. Of course there are of the stories of whenever a Jedi fell in love it was easier for them to fall to the influence of the dark side.

I think they should be able to hook up. Not being able to is going against one nature and I can't support that.

Thatks the kind of discussion points I find interesting - that there *is* a real world precedent for “warrior monks” practicing celibacy… but there’s also real world precedents demonstrating how that can be a dangerous doctrine in and of itself, with a whole lot of philosophical debate about why it would or wouldn’t be wise.

It also doesn’t help that I believe Lucas one time tried to clarify he meant it as “celibate enough to avoid commitments to others when they should be wholly focused on the Force and the Order” rather than “chaste enough to avoid complications that would naturally follow from gettin’ jiggy with it as a servant to Force and the Order.”

There’s plenty of modern religious organizations and callings that reject the celibacy argument by holding that human nature is naturally inclined towards companionship to an extent that can’t be denied, and that commitment to a greater cause can be actually reinforced by healthy companionship of the conjugal kind.

And of course, there’s always that argument that while Anakin’s unhealthy, possessive attachment to Padme led him to the dark side, it was a healthy, selfless attachment to Luke that redeemed him. And to put it bluntly, it more flexible and fun to have Jedi characters who can be in a romance.

I believe Filoni once said that he didn’t think Luke’s character would be the type for a romance. I understand sort of what he was getting at with a comparison to Frodo after LOTR, but I personally felt that was a bit of an empty idealization - that some people have trouble accepting the idea of their favorite heroes entering a stage of life distinct from where they were most used to them, and think they just wouldn’t. I kind of see it as similar to people who instinctually hate superheroes being married; a limiting perspective born more from a desire for familiarity than actual conviction.

Now, I think Johnson didn’t do it because he wanted a disillusioned, pretentious “Sad White Boy” story, but that’s different.

[CosmiComic]

I think imposed celibacy, in terms of banning marriage and kids, isn't necessary or correct. However, I don't really need Luke to have a romance.

[ChrisIII]

I think Lucas clarified that the celibacy doesn't necessarily mean total abstinence. One of the recent novels for example had a Jedi working with Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon who "gets around" so to speak.

Marriage and family on the other hand....

[Immortal Weapon]

I think Lucas clarified that the celibacy doesn't necessarily mean total abstinence. One of the recent novels for example had a Jedi working with Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon who "gets around" so to speak.

Marriage and family on the other hand....

Jedis can do hook ups as long as they don't get attached?

[Ascended]

- Does Luke work better with a capacity for romance, marriage, and raising a family, like in Legends? Or was that always incongruous with his characterization and archetype, and he “should” remain single, like the Disney canon?

I think Luke works better with the "option" for romance, but I don't see him as someone who really "needs" it. I don't believe it goes against his characterization or archetype to pursue a relationship, but it's never been a core element of his character and I don't think it should be. Romance isn't something Luke should forbid himself, but it's also not something I think he cares very much about either.

Given the way the sequels played out, I think the Skywalker bloodline *needs* to continue. Palpatine's did, the Skywalkers must too. Since Leia only had the one kid (I wouldn't believe the reveal of another now) that kinda forces our hand on Mara Jade. And for that, I can see a very casual, but deep, relationship. They'd love each other, be loyal to each other, but largely just live their lives and be content being away from each other for long stretches, and without the need of being officially married. If Luke got to be a father before losing his family (he must wrongfully believe they're gone when he goes into exile or he's a massive d-bag) he would've gone out of his way to be a great one.

But if not for the sequels and the need for the Skywalker bloodline to balance out Palpatine's, I would happily accept a Luke who never cared to be in any relationship at all.

I've also recently considered the idea of a gay Luke for the first time, and I find that I'm perfectly open to the idea. Except for the fact that Rey's lineage and thematic balance demand another Skywalker I would've gladly accepted Luke being in a relationship with a man. Maybe a nice Rodian or Twi'lek?

- Should the PT-era Jedi celibacy aspect be viewed as “correct orthodoxy” in-universe, or an outdated idea from a too-dogmatic Order in-universe? How much should future creators respect or honor the idea?

The old Order's stance should be considered "classic" orthodoxy (whatever that is?), and maybe some Jedi still practice it, but I think the new Order must abandon the celibacy rule. That ideology played a big role in Anakin's fall and there's no point to a new Jedi order if it's just gonna be like the last one. So like many real monk philosophies out there, the Jedi should be allowed to pursue love in whatever manner they prefer, or omit it from their lives completely. Whatever helps keeps you on the path of the Light side of the Force, yknow?

[Jackalope89]

Jedis can do hook ups as long as they don't get attached?

Pretty much. One night stands to relieve some "tension"? Order doesn't prohibit it. Developing emotional ties to a significant other? Obi-Wan and Ahsoka looked the other way for Anakin and Padme, but Anakin and Padme were treading some dangerous waters at the time.

I don't know what the official punishment would have been, but yeah.


Personally though, I like it being optional. If the individual doesn't want a significant other? That's fine. If they start a family? Also fine, but need to watch the whole dynastic thing. And also those born of 2 Jedi are supposed to have incredible potential with the Force, if I remember right.

[godisawesome]

I’ve always been leery about Lucas’s idea of emotionally detached but still sensual Jedi - and not out of prudishness, but because I find that idea hard to work both from a psychological standpoint and a lore one. A Deadbeat Dad Jedi certainly isn’t one that the audience is going to want to read about being “obedient to the orthodoxy.”

Plus, on a somewhat cheesier level, the fact an actual relationship would be “dirty” by its very nature of commitment would be half the fun of writing a Jedi romance when the celibacy rule is still around.

Jedi James Bond would be interesting more for his power and skills, and less so for the obligatory gets-laid-once-an-adventure aspects; Star Wars is innately “romantic” even when grungy, rather than grungy even when romantic.

I think Luke works better with the "option" for romance, but I don't see him as someone who really "needs" it. I don't believe it goes against his characterization or archetype to pursue a relationship, but it's never been a core element of his character and I don't think it should be. Romance isn't something Luke should forbid himself, but it's also not something I think he cares very much about either.

Given the way the sequels played out, I think the Skywalker bloodline *needs* to continue. Palpatine's did, the Skywalkers must too. Since Leia only had the one kid (I wouldn't believe the reveal of another now) that kinda forces our hand on Mara Jade. And for that, I can see a very casual, but deep, relationship. They'd love each other, be loyal to each other, but largely just live their lives and be content being away from each other for long stretches, and without the need of being officially married. If Luke got to be a father before losing his family (he must wrongfully believe they're gone when he goes into exile or he's a massive d-bag) he would've gone out of his way to be a great one.

But if not for the sequels and the need for the Skywalker bloodline to balance out Palpatine's, I would happily accept a Luke who never cared to be in any relationship at all.

I've also recently considered the idea of a gay Luke for the first time, and I find that I'm perfectly open to the idea. Except for the fact that Rey's lineage and thematic balance demand another Skywalker I would've gladly accepted Luke being in a relationship with a man. Maybe a nice Rodian or Twi'lek?



The old Order's stance should be considered "classic" orthodoxy (whatever that is?), and maybe some Jedi still practice it, but I think the new Order must abandon the celibacy rule. That ideology played a big role in Anakin's fall and there's no point to a new Jedi order if it's just gonna be like the last one. So like many real monk philosophies out there, the Jedi should be allowed to pursue love in whatever manner they prefer, or omit it from their lives completely. Whatever helps keeps you on the path of the Light side of the Force, yknow?

I have to admit, I kind fo share the opinion that Luke’s story could be “fixed” with an offscreen romance and kid for the period before the ST… but I also think it would provide a potential salvation for Rey; she could more believably “earn” her Skywalker name if she were the mentor and guardian for Luke’s actual daughter, for instance.

The main issue, of course, would be how many people would see that new character as having the story Rey “should” have had, and see Luke’s new story as being what the ST “should” have contained… and some members of LFL would likely think of it as too much of a mea culpa for the company to go through with.

[Powerboy]

Thought this was a pair of topics each with an interesting discussion to have, but that there was enough of an overlap and likelihood for tangent they might fit in the same thread:

- Does Luke work better with a capacity for romance, marriage, and raising a family, like in Legends? Or was that always incongruous with his characterization and archetype, and he “should” remain single, like the Disney canon?

- Should the PT-era Jedi celibacy aspect be viewed as “correct orthodoxy” in-universe, or an outdated idea from a too-dogmatic Order in-universe? How much should future creators respect or honor the idea?

I’ll make no bones about the fact that I tend to prefer my fictional characters to be both able to marry, and to eventually act on it; I have no respect for anything about One More Day in Spider-Man, and thought the New 52’s attempt to break up marriages across the board was incredibly stupid. And yeah, I was a fan of Luke and Mara Jade, even though I didn’t think it was perfect. I also tend to think that the celibacy idea was created by Lucas to serve an internal-conflict point in AOTC rather than as an intrinsic, inescapable truth of being a Jedi… and my own personal history as a Protestant Christian means that my view of the celibacy idea is one of philosophical rejection.

What’s your guys’ ideas on these things?

It harkens back to the Old West television shows and similar shows where the sheriff wouldn't marry and risk his wife becoming a widower. In real life, most of the Old West lawmen were married.

To the best of my memory, the whole "Jedi cannot have loved ones because it weakens their emotional control" thing is purely a product of the prequels and also pretty much total BS to begin with. Being a loveless monk can pretty much mess up your emotional state as bad or worse.

I don't hate the prequels and even like them as, for me, non-canon fun. But the only parts I see as canon are those verified in the original trilogy by character statements without reading into them anything more than what can generally be known from those statements without conjecture. So, it's easy for me to accept a non-canon source that moves the story in a direction I prefer.

[Powerboy]

I’ve always been leery about Lucas’s idea of emotionally detached but still sensual Jedi - and not out of prudishness, but because I find that idea hard to work both from a psychological standpoint and a lore one. A Deadbeat Dad Jedi certainly isn’t one that the audience is going to want to read about being “obedient to the orthodoxy.”

Plus, on a somewhat cheesier level, the fact an actual relationship would be “dirty” by its very nature of commitment would be half the fun of writing a Jedi romance when the celibacy rule is still around.

Jedi James Bond would be interesting more for his power and skills, and less so for the obligatory gets-laid-once-an-adventure aspects; Star Wars is innately “romantic” even when grungy, rather than grungy even when romantic.



I have to admit, I kind fo share the opinion that Luke’s story could be “fixed” with an offscreen romance and kid for the period before the ST… but I also think it would provide a potential salvation for Rey; she could more believably “earn” her Skywalker name if she were the mentor and guardian for Luke’s actual daughter, for instance.

The main issue, of course, would be how many people would see that new character as having the story Rey “should” have had, and see Luke’s new story as being what the ST “should” have contained… and some members of LFL would likely think of it as too much of a mea culpa for the company to go through with.

I don't think they'll ever change the official canon now. It's too ingrained in people's minds and some of that comes from George Lucas himself who I say has every right to mess up Star Wars because it's his creation.

At this point, I think there are all sorts of canons based on people's preferences, ranging from the official "All the movies are canon" to "The first six movies and many of the novels are canon" to "Only the original trilogy is canon" to my personal "The original trilogy, Rogue One, the Mandalorian and anything else I may discover that doesn't contradict the original trilogy and that I like is canon".

Ultimately, it's fiction. Head canon is whatever you want it to be. Officially, in reality, future movies will probably proceed from the idea that all the movies are canon. The closest I think we'll ever get to any sort of reboot in our lifetimes is just leaving the events of the prequels (with the Mediclorians, the Virgin Birth, and so on) in the past and never referring to them and maybe the same with the third trilogy.

[Ascended]

I have to admit, I kind fo share the opinion that Luke’s story could be “fixed” with an offscreen romance and kid for the period before the ST… but I also think it would provide a potential salvation for Rey; she could more believably “earn” her Skywalker name if she were the mentor and guardian for Luke’s actual daughter, for instance.

Agreed. The one saving grace of the sequels is that there's enough blank space between events, new elements can be brought in to pull the franchise back on course without having to break the canon.

Luke had students who survived Ben's attack on the temple/school. Mara (or some other woman) existed and had a child with Luke. Those two changes offer all you need to pull the franchise back into shape.

I think it's rather telling that all the new products coming out are set before the sequels. Bad Batch, Kenobi, Ashoka.....I think Disney knows they took a wrong turn with the sequel films and they're dealing with it by not dealing with it.

The main issue, of course, would be how many people would see that new character as having the story Rey “should” have had, and see Luke’s new story as being what the ST “should” have contained… and some members of LFL would likely think of it as too much of a mea culpa for the company to go through with.

It's an issue, sure. But Disney should have thought of that before they allowed more crappy movies to be made. Better to course correct now, than go bravely forward in a way nobody actually likes.

I'm pretty sure the majority of fans would support adjustments like what we're talking about here even if it does highlight the problems with the sequels. Luke ends up looking better. Rey's story is reinforced and supported. The thematics of the franchise are better balanced, and nothing in the films is actually contradicted. It'll be harder to pretend the sequels were good films that properly honored what came before....but who cares?

[ChrisIII]

The novel HEIR TO THE JEDI and the Marvel comics both had Luke involved in a bit of romance (Not with Leia), although in both cases it was before ESB, where Luke had an extremely limited knowledge of the force/Jedi. (He's never even really told what the Dark side is, for instance-Obi-Wan instantly starts talking about the force in general after bringing it up in his explanation of Vader).

[CosmiComic]

Why exactly does Luke need a kid?