Luke sounded kinda romantic when he asked Ahsoka" Will I see you again?" Seems hypocritical. The rule does seem dumb though.
Luke sounded kinda romantic when he asked Ahsoka" Will I see you again?" Seems hypocritical. The rule does seem dumb though.
I like it as an unrealistic and old-fashioned ideal that was partly to blame for the destruction of their order. Luke's role was supposed to bring balance - not just between "light" and "dark", but between this ascetic life and one of attachments. Unfortunately, the films, etc. ended up spending so much time going backwards, showing us the old Jedi Order and feeling a need to still make them "heroes" instead of a new Jedi Order post RotJ that could have demonstrated this new, more balanced ideal.(and y'know... instead they had Ben burn it to the ground)
Wonder what Rey's policy will be if they go forward on that. Granted she doesn't have any family connections-just parents she barely knew and a "grandfather" who was pure evil and not redeemable like Vader (Palpatine's "son" is a failed clone so the grandfather thing is a bit iffy), but obviously cares a great deal for Finn and Poe.
chrism227.wordpress.com Info and opinions on a variety of interests.
https://twitter.com/chrisprtsmouth
I think the philosophy made sense and worked for the old Jedi Order. It fit the kind of organization they were (or had been, before hypocrisy and politics pulled them from the path). But for several reasons it's not something I want to return post-Empire.
For one, it's not something that Luke ever followed. And while attachment has bit him in the ass before (Cloud City) it's also why he was able to save Vader. I don't think the "no attachment" thing is something that Luke would really agree with, nor something his personal experiences support. Sure, he's talking about a lack of attachment right now with Grogu, but that's just plot over character; setting up parallels and differences between the Jedi and Mandalorian creed and making Grogu decide who he wants his daddy to be. And for all we know Luke's taking this tact with Grogu because of the trauma the poor child has gone through; it might be a situational thing more than a blanket policy.
And if the new Jedi are just going to do things like the old Jedi did, then what was the damn point of the entire saga? Did Anakin go through all that, did Luke, just so things would go back to normal? How's that balancing the Force? No, the new Jedi need to be different from what came before, and this is a pretty prominent point to highlight those differences.
I wouldn't be against a particular sect of Jedi following the old creed, should more than a single organization rise up from the ashes of the sequel trilogy, nor would I have a problem with individual Jedi following the old ways even if the larger organization didn't. But I don't think it's something that should be the norm, for all Jedi/Force users, going forward.
"We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another, as if we were one single tribe."
~ Black Panther.
The No attachments rule was an artifact for a different era. Post the Sith “dying off” in the wars about a thousand years ago, the rule was implemented it seems so that fewer Jedi would be drawn to potentially falling to the Darkside. Because when you have overly powerful attachments, when they are in danger you will do anything to save them (Anakin).
However, it should also be noted that ‘no attachments’ does not mean no care, or love, or affection. Plo Koon clearly cares for Ahsoka, Obi-Wan straight up loves Satine (admitted he would leave the Order for her) and Anakin (in a brotherly way), and there are clearly Jedi that cared for others and each other greatly (Kanan all but married Hera, and Luke clearly had attachments to Ben, Han, and Leia). But when attachments become all consuming, or when you are willing to put that attachment above your duty to the Galaxy, that is when things go bad.
In the EU of the Prequel era, we even had a few Jedi that were married (Ki Adi Mundi as an example) and Tholme fell in love with another Jedi after they both survived Order 66, but both still did their duty.
The No attachments should remain, I think, but the wording should be altered to reflect the actual meaning (that nothing should be put above the greater good of the Galaxy, and you shouldn’t allow your attachments to become possessive). What Luke gave to Grogu as a choice made sense to me. Grogu had already formed an unusually strong bond with Din, and letting go of that would be extremely difficult for him. Enough so that the bond could easily be twisted into something….obsessive or controlling (or used against Grogu or Din if the other was put into danger).
Black Knight of SO
Owner/Operator of SO’s Item/Weapon Shop
Claimer of the original Rumbles 2,000,000th post
CBR GM/DM
Note, I think EU Luke did a good job of showcasing that you can have attachments and not put them above the Galaxy. Mara Jade and he were awesome together, and that is something a I would like to see reflected if they do anything with her and him in the future. They should be married and allowed to showcase the growth of the Jedi Order.
Black Knight of SO
Owner/Operator of SO’s Item/Weapon Shop
Claimer of the original Rumbles 2,000,000th post
CBR GM/DM
This is my feeling as well…
…Thoigh on top of that, I also just know that I find that the more swashbuckling a Jedi can be, the more compelling and functional they seem to me as a protagonist. My favorite Legends Jedi for different eras? Zayne Carrick, Quinlan Vos, and Kyle Katarn - all swashbucklers who had writers just flat out embrace letting them be a bit “romantic” in their stylings, both dramatically and in terms of relationships.
And of course, George Lucas himself kept on bending the rule whenever he felt it made a better story.
So it might as well be a key part of the Jedi going forward.
Like action, adventure, rogues, and outlaws? Like anti-heroes, femme fatales, mysteries and thrillers?
I wrote a book with them. Outlaw’s Shadow: A Sherwood Noir. Robin Hood’s evil counterpart, Guy of Gisbourne, is the main character. Feel free to give it a look: https://read.amazon.com/kp/embed?asi...E2PKBNJFH76GQP
In what could be the biggest dick move in SW history, Luke gets his feelings hurt that Grogu chooses Mando over him and packs him up in his X-Wing and sends him to a planet that he hopes the Mandalorian is on. He couldn't be bothered to do this himself because he was meditating?
AKA FlashFreak
Favorite Characters:
DC: The Flash (Jay & Wally), Starman- Jack Knight, Stargirl, & Shazam!.
MARVEL: Daredevil, Spider-Man (Peter Parker), & Doctor Strange.
Current Pulls: Not a thing!
Rey is going to have so many students turn to the Darkside.
Student: Master Rey what did you do when you had trouble learning something?
Rey: I never had trouble mastering something.
Student: Well...it's just that I'm afraid of lightsabers. I don't want to lose a fight and die.
Rey: Oh. Can't help you there I have never lost a lightsaber fight. Have you considered using force lighting?
Student: Isn't that a Darkside ability?
Rey: I use it all the time. Just don't turn to the Darkside.
"The Marvel EIC Chair has a certain curse that goes along with it: it tends to drive people insane, and ultimately, out of the business altogether. It is the notorious last stop for many staffers, as once you've sat in The Big Chair, your pariah status is usually locked in." Christopher Priest
RUMOR: Star Wars Has Plans for a New Post-Sequel Trilogy Jedi Order
https://www.cbr.com/rumor-star-wars-...equel-trilogy/
"Dedra Meero is not just a woman in a men’s world, but a fascist in a world of fascists.” - Denise Gough
"The Marvel EIC Chair has a certain curse that goes along with it: it tends to drive people insane, and ultimately, out of the business altogether. It is the notorious last stop for many staffers, as once you've sat in The Big Chair, your pariah status is usually locked in." Christopher Priest
"The Marvel EIC Chair has a certain curse that goes along with it: it tends to drive people insane, and ultimately, out of the business altogether. It is the notorious last stop for many staffers, as once you've sat in The Big Chair, your pariah status is usually locked in." Christopher Priest