![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The Jedi in the Old Republic are an active force of peacekeepers and troubleshooters. They are similar in function to the Texas Rangers of history -- they come to hot spots, help put down the riot, and move on.
It's just *how* they do that that gives me shivers.
The Jedi Mind Trick (patent pending) we first saw in the original movie, where Ben Kenobi uses it to get by an enemy checkpoint. That's a perfectly ethical use of the talent, in a situation of war and espionage. So is Luke's use of it in RotJ, when he's going into Jabba's compound. Both situations are where the Jedi are dealing with people out to hurt them -- enemies, in other words -- and need all the leverage they can get.
It's just later, in the prequels, where I begin to wonder.
In TPM, when Qui-Gon attempts to use it on Watto, he's in a pretty desperate situation -- stranded on gangster territory, with enemies tracking him and his shipmates. He *must* get the parts to repair the ship, but his Republican dactaries aren't worthwhile currency out on the Rim. However, if he'd succeed in mind-tricking Watto into accepting worthless money, how would that have differed from theft? Watto wasn't trying to hurt Qui-Gon, he just wanted to be paid in useful currency for what he was selling.
That he might have tried to trick Qui-Gon later when they were discussing the bet and freeing Anakin and Shmi doesn't really matter, as we know Watto isn't a nice being. Qui-Gon, on the other hand, is supposed to be a good person, as he's a Jedi Knight and thus a defender of order and bringer of justice. Should he really be stealing property and rigging dice games?
When Obi-Wan uses the mind trick on the man selling deathsticks in AotC, it is funny on the surface, and rather disturbing underneath. Is Obi-Wan allowed to mind-whammy anyone who he finds conducting shady business? Who decides what is unpleasant but acceptable work, and what deserves mental tampering? The man is selling dubious merchandise to say the least, but he is a Coruscant resident, and thus someone whom Obi-Wan is supposed to protect, at least in theory.
I don't know that I'd trust the judgement of the Jedi, no matter how stellar they are supposed to be.
It's just *how* they do that that gives me shivers.
The Jedi Mind Trick (patent pending) we first saw in the original movie, where Ben Kenobi uses it to get by an enemy checkpoint. That's a perfectly ethical use of the talent, in a situation of war and espionage. So is Luke's use of it in RotJ, when he's going into Jabba's compound. Both situations are where the Jedi are dealing with people out to hurt them -- enemies, in other words -- and need all the leverage they can get.
It's just later, in the prequels, where I begin to wonder.
In TPM, when Qui-Gon attempts to use it on Watto, he's in a pretty desperate situation -- stranded on gangster territory, with enemies tracking him and his shipmates. He *must* get the parts to repair the ship, but his Republican dactaries aren't worthwhile currency out on the Rim. However, if he'd succeed in mind-tricking Watto into accepting worthless money, how would that have differed from theft? Watto wasn't trying to hurt Qui-Gon, he just wanted to be paid in useful currency for what he was selling.
That he might have tried to trick Qui-Gon later when they were discussing the bet and freeing Anakin and Shmi doesn't really matter, as we know Watto isn't a nice being. Qui-Gon, on the other hand, is supposed to be a good person, as he's a Jedi Knight and thus a defender of order and bringer of justice. Should he really be stealing property and rigging dice games?
When Obi-Wan uses the mind trick on the man selling deathsticks in AotC, it is funny on the surface, and rather disturbing underneath. Is Obi-Wan allowed to mind-whammy anyone who he finds conducting shady business? Who decides what is unpleasant but acceptable work, and what deserves mental tampering? The man is selling dubious merchandise to say the least, but he is a Coruscant resident, and thus someone whom Obi-Wan is supposed to protect, at least in theory.
I don't know that I'd trust the judgement of the Jedi, no matter how stellar they are supposed to be.
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
He finally gets Luke, who loves unconditionally and forgives without reason, and thus is a better man than almost anyone in the series.
The wizards of the Potterverse believe that once a wizard turns Dark, nothing and no one matters to them any more.
The Potterverse is disturbing. The Wizarding World is deeply unscrupulous and hypocritical, and you know that a person who decries 'Dark' magic feels no compunction about messing with his Muggle neighbors, as long as they can get away with it.
At least the Jedi tended to be as hard on themselves as they were on everyone else.
He needed redemption, and that's a different thing altogether. I think Peter needs it as well.
What's the line from Buffy? Something about 'forgiveness is never deserved. It's given, or it's not.'
Forgiveness is grace, and both Anakin and Peter need it. I don't know if Peter will get it though.
From:
no subject
Luke is wonderfully unreasonable. He has no cause for thinking that his father has some good still in him, but, in the face of all logic, he believes it. And he stands by it, knowing that Vader has been the servant of the Emperor for years, knowing that Vader and he have no history at all, knowing that the Emperor could kill him before Vader acts. He is everything that the Old Republic Jedi were not: spectacularly, illogically compassionate. And, as you said, the best man in the series, because he forgives and doesn't judge. I love Luke for that.
I just found a lovely quote about love by Lisa Hoffman: "Love is like pi--natural, irrational and very important." That sounds like Luke.
The Potterverse strikes me as "a nice place to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there." I don't like their government (in which there's no legislature, and the Minister of Magic and the members of the Wizengamot all seem to be appointed). I don't like a system that allows people to be thrown in prison for life without a trial. Most of all, I don't like the wizarding world's attitude toward Muggles--that they're somehow inferior or less intelligent because they don't know about magic. Even those who supposedly like Muggles make comments about how really remarkable it is that Muggles have invented this or discovered that, and it's so ingenious of them to be able to exist without magic. It all sounds like a not-so-subtle putdown, even when spoken by "Muggle-lovers" such as Arthur Weasley. It's as if the speakers need to assure themselves that these clever, inventive, ingenious Muggles really are inferior, despite the fact that most magical inventions seem to be Muggle inventions that have been enchanted. This doesn't say much for the inventiveness of wizards. Basically, the wizarding world seems rather static. It does not change. It does not like change.
At least the Jedi tended to be as hard on themselves as they were on everyone else.
True. They weren't merciful, but they were scrupulously fair. The wizarding world isn't even that.
I don't know if Peter will get the grace and forgiveness he needs or not. I just hope he does.