I saw the original Star Wars on a gigantic screen in a movie theater in Montgomery, Alabama about a week after it first hit the theaters. I can’t swear to it, of course, but I’m convinced there were a lot of eyes rolling when Alec Guinness delivered that infamous line. We knew dang good and well that Obi-Wan had lied by omission and that ‘point of view’ didn’t justify it. Luke may have accepted it – at least he didn’t punch Obi-Wan – but we all knew.
Luke was a plucky country boy with dreams of greatness. He wasn’t going to sass his mentor (that much anyway) – but there’s a cut almost immediately after the end of the scene. We don’t really see Luke’s full reaction and we can’t know then whether or not he internalizes it. Spoiler alert: he doesn’t.
It’s ironic, but the second trilogy does a better job developing Obi-Wan than it does Anakin. We get to see why Obi-Wan buys into the philosophy of the Jedi – beyond merely being one. Probably a good thing because by the turn of the century, the audience had begun to buy into the junk philosophy that all us Seventies kids knew was a lie.
Obi-Wan is the more complex of the two – he saw his mentor die and is convinced that the reason was that they – he – hadn’t been diligent enough in seeking balance. He choses to honor his mentor’s intention – but that’s the only relic of Qui-Gon Jinn’s teaching. Obi-Wan is now all in on Jedi Philosophy 101.
Which ends up going hideously and hysterically wrong, of course. When his pupil needs help navigating good and evil, Obi-Wan wants him to cling to the Balance. But that compromise with evil that the Jedi are so intent upon is what blinds them to the reality of evil – and ultimately destroys not only the sweet little boy that built C-3PO, but the Jedi themselves.
Anakin stands in stark contrast to his son. Anakin is morally confused – his morality descends to the point of mere pain avoidance. Luke is morally virtuous – he might be a cocky little twit at times, but his morality drives him to seek the salvation of his father. Anakin destroys; Luke builds. The difference is character – and the content thereof. The difference is that Luke cares about right and wrong.
It’s part of what drives him to seek Ben Kenobi in the first place. Sure, he wants off that sand dune of a planet and he craves adventure – but he goes to Ben to deliver a message with the intent of being home for supper because it’s the right thing to do. It’s why he wants to save the princess – sure, it’s fun, but he would do it even if it weren’t – turning his back on people in need is not something Luke has in him.
Qui-Gon would have regretted ever saying ‘we’re not here to free some slaves’ to Luke’s face. Sure, he’d win the fight – but he’d be shocked at how easily he’d started it. Qui-Gon was himself becoming aware that there was something wrong with his philosophy so he might well have benefitted from meeting the cocky little twit who of course hadn’t even been born at the time. Point being, Luke’s concern about right and wrong – justice and injustice – didn’t let him ignore the plight of others. Had Qui-Gon had the same drive he wouldn’t have set in motion the destruction of the Jedi – might have noticed Jar-Jar wasn’t what he seemed, as well.
Luke’s the least interesting character in Star Wars – if you look at him from his bio. But he’s actually the most interesting when you see how much in contrast to the rest of that mixed up galaxy far, far away he really is. Takes after his momma, that boy does – Luke never buys that life is a compromise with evil or that it should be. Right and wrong matter – and he’s willing to put his life on the line for what he believes is right. Annoys the snot out of everyone in the process – especially Yoda – but that’s what makes him a hero. It’s what makes him great.
