Journals of the Whills

I read your other post going into further detail about how you see the evolution of the Jedi.  I agree with some of it, disagree with other parts of it.  Whereas I can agree that there were some issues with the Jedi Order during the Clone Wars, you make some leaps that don't agree with canon.  I don't believe that Jedi have been "generals" for thousands of years (I believe that was why it was such a new conundrum for the Order in the Clone Wars).  Also, while their arrogance may have helped blind them, it wasn't the core issue in their ability to be deceived.  The Jedi Temple was built on an ancient Sith Shrine and the Jedi were unaware that previous magical workings were taking effect.  This is what was referred to in the movie as the "Shroud of the Dark Side."  The Jedi were going to have problems discerning the future regardless of their hubris.

I also disagree fundamentally with your take on TESB's Yoda.  While I certainly see that Yoda has gone a little bit more into sage mode vs. his "still a warrior" persona in the PT, I simply can't agree that Yoda intended Luke to do anything other than dispatch Vader.  But I've already made my argument on that.

Regardless of our various agreements or disagreements on the philosophical underpinnings of the PT and OT and whether or not Lucas ever intended the progression you're suggesting (and I'm not saying he didn't intend to bring in the Whills because we all know he did...I'm purely talking about how that was going to work), why would we want the story to evolve that way?  Okay, so what if it is true?  Why would I want to see the Jedi literally turn into what Yoda said on Dagobah?  That sounds terrible.  (Actually, it sounds a lot like TLJ now that I think about it.)  Movies that consist purely of virtuous heroes who continuously and solely help people escape?

Barring divine intervention of some kind, violence is required to end violence. 

When the Rebellion blew up the DS, they killed about a million people.  If they hadn't, billions of people would have died.  Virtuous violence is what makes heroism work.  Both in fiction and reality.

I'm not interested in seeing shaolin monks sitting around philosophizing.  Attempted diplomacy is good and has its part both in reality and fiction, but agents of evil will never be satisfied and must be dealt with by virtuous violence.   And it's best when it's played out with a "laser sword."

Doesn't matter.  It's canon.  And to argue the opposite side of the coin, there are stories in Legends material that identify congruent events to the aforementioned shrine.  Thus, these are stories Lucas approved.  Why approve them if they didn't add to or align with his film vision?


Sounds to me like you're describing exactly what Luke should have done on Crait, by showing up and killing the FO forces gathered outside a supposed no-exit cave that his few remaining friends were about to be slaughtered in.  I also believe this is what started this whole debate and the reason we are discussing the Whills and the evolution of the Jedi in the first place.  Righteous execution (which by any decent definition includes "self-defense" and "saving what we love") has always been a part of the Jedi Order and always should be and Yoda never intended it to be otherwise.  And that's exactly why people don't agree with "astral-projection Luke idea," why they are unhappy with the lack of light sabering by him and why I disagree with your assessment that handling it this way is organic to the flow of the story since Ep. I.  It's not; it's completely obtuse to where the stream was running.

Disagree.  He planned first degree murder against Palpatine in ROTS.  That was not self-defense and nobody's life was immediately in jeopardy when he attacked him.  But the reason he attacked him was because he knew that in dispatching him, many lives would be saved in the future.


As evidenced by which character in the history of SW before TLJ's hippy Luke?