Why Are the Sith so Bad?

JoanDrake

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
1,445
Besides the fact that Lucas needed a protagonist?

They are rather harsh in their method of rule and philosophy, that is true, but one can argue that is the nature of government. Wielding power is often not pretty, particularly when you have several fractious elements who are unwilling to compromise

I apologize if this has been handled in another thread
 
The Sith are evil rather like orcs are evil in Lord of the Rings.

They are the force of efficiency, brutality and a lack of free will. Notice how in "A New Hope" their concept of ruling the Galaxy is basically to build a huge planet cannon and threaten everyone with destruction of their whole world. They destroy Alderon to torment the Princess; but also for a weapons test. Billions of lives destroyed for a very trivial matter (in comparison).

They have a casual air to violence and dictatorship ruling which is in stark contrast to the more peaceful Alliance based on the concepts of democracy.

This whole democracy VS dictatorship is an often used display of good VS evil - esp for US based films.


Sith are also, force wise, generally seen as those eager for power without limit; eager to use the Force for their own personal, selfish gains rather than to use the force for the betterment of others. It's the classic display of those who are selfish and those who wish to contribute to the betterment of the group/pack/society. A Sith lord has no problem using the force to twist people to their own needs; whilst a Jedi would only use the force if they had to and even then they'd be aiming for that "great good for all" as their prime objective.


Another analogy is an ant-hive. The Sith view the universe and those within as ants to do their bidding and if they refuse they stamp them out. Again its that brutal uncaring edge that marks the Sith as evil.



Of course the Sith are not mindlessly evil, they have purpose behind their actions and they are not in that vain of evil where they are slicing people into little bits just because they are sadistic (although they do tend to have a sadistic twist to many of them). Like the orc obeying their master, the Sith wish for the universe to run according to their rule.

That said we never saw the Sith at the true height of power unopposed for many generations; it is suspected that the longer the Sith would remain in power the more brutal, the more twisted the universe would become as generations of Sith would replace each other (through a faux survival of fittest series of battles and dominations). It could be said that during A New Hope living under the Sith was oppressive for the average person, although we never really saw life in the core worlds under Sith rule; only those on the rim. However life was not horrific so there could be some argument that, at that time, life under the Sith wasn't "too bad" although it was in stark contrast to the democracy that was around only a generation before.
 
That's a very well written answer, comprehensive and well thought out, thank you.

It's just hard for me to accept that all the Sith were unwaveringly evil, weren't there reformers in their history?
 
Last edited:
I think its clear that those with the Force on both sides can change sides even multiple times in their life. They have a degree of freedom of choice which the Force appears to battle over internally between the light and the dark sides. Anakin/Vader is a prime example of one who moved from the Light to the Dark and then back to the Light again.

I think one key is that when one with the Force changes sides it makes a huge impact upon them, rather like part of their personality and choices in life are in part influenced/dictated by the Force side they are attuned with. This seems to spark the desire for those who change sides to change their name and even their outward persona. They are almost a totally different person when different sides of the Force attune with them.


A pet theory - a lot of the unease we see with a young adult Anakin could be because the light and dark sides of the force are battling for him and since the Force affects personality and choices it results in a rather unstable person. This subtle theme is even carried through into the new film!
 
Since I know the Sith will take a shellacking in this thread, I suppose I'll make a small effort to advocate their position. A small note, if you're a fanatic about was is and isn't cannon, you should probably stop reading right here.
On a basic level there is the notion of Universal Definition - it takes one to define the other. Dark to define light in this case. When the Sith are absent from the galactic stage the Jedi tend to get fat and lazy to an extent (and prideful, according to Yoda himself).
The Sith aren't necessarily all bad, like any other group a lot depends of the individual. Essentially they're capitalists, in it for the enrichment of self, letting nothing stand in their way, in short - Americans. They would fit right into our current Capitalist Plutocracy where anything and everything is for sale and the mighty corporations subvert or deny the rule of law.
They believe in survival of the fittest and improving their order by developing stronger Sith Lords over time via the Rule Of Two. Succession into the dominant role is facilitated by gaining greater power than one's Master. This mirrors nature to a large extent - strong Sith survive, weak Sith die off and the Order is improved.
While Sith have certainly been responsible for some despicable acts (The Death Star, Anakin slaying younglings in the Jedi Temple) the Jedi aren't exactly squeaky clean. They have been known to lie ("your Father's dead") and murder indiscriminately, without arrest or trial, especially when it comes to aliens. In A New Hope Obi Wan could've used the force to harmlessly intervene on Luke's behalf, but he cuts off the alien's arm instead. Youch! Luke doesn't hesitate to Force choke (his Old Man's signature move) Jabba's guards when entering his palace in Return when he could've easily just clouded their minds. It's also worth noting that Sidious and Vader didn't build and test the Death Star themselves, it took support from an entire civilization (lousy enablers!) and government to make that happen. The order to destroy Alderaan wasn't even given by a Sith Lord, it was stuffy old Grand Moff Tarkin - bureaucrats are even worse than the Sith!
Sith have even acted in a positive way - Asajj Ventress helped Ahsoka Tano when she was on the run in the Clone Wars for example. The Sith philosophy can result in lives saved - Sidious saved Plagueis from being killed, Zannah saved Bane, Vader saved Luke. Being a Dark Sider doesn't preclude an occasional positive contribution.
Then you have so-called Dark Jedi like Set Harth, trying to have it both ways, blurring the line a bit.
So there you have it, a Saul Goodmanesque attempt to defend the Sith themselves. :)
 
Jedi can certainly become decadent however I think one thing we might draw from that is that no Force user is ever pure. Jedi have good and bad in them and thus it makes sense that if "the dark side" is rising in strength it would affect the Jedi as well, Yoda even speaks of this as well. Not just strength but also how they behave and act; notice how Sith are absent for generations and then suddenly there's several Sith lords one after the other in quick succession. The Emperor appears to have no difficulty in finding new apprentices. Granted part of that is him grooming potentials early on, but I think its also showing us that the Dark side is growing in strength.

Jedi I think require extensive training to avoid becoming Sith; something that might help them avoid violent actions or miss-use of their abilities. However there is certain room for a grey area in the middle; although the nature of the Force suggests that it will push people more toward one or the other.



Film wise we've never seen a long term Sith Empire nor even society last for generations. We've no real base line to know how they would react after generations of Sith or a prolonged Emperor. Further we've no idea how Jedi nor Sith affect the general population. It's clear that they have some influence and that Sith and Jedi will promote agents (directly or indirectly) to further their own cause.


It's something we might never know in formal films
 
Besides the fact that Lucas needed a protagonist?

They are rather harsh in their method of rule and philosophy, that is true, but one can argue that is the nature of government. Wielding power is often not pretty, particularly when you have several fractious elements who are unwilling to compromise

I apologize if this has been handled in another thread

The presentation of the Dark Side has changed over the years.

If you look at the original trilogy, the Dark Side is the 'easy way' and those who are in fear or succumb to hatred can be 'consumed' by it. We learn of course there is a way out, and it isn't by wistful thinking. The mystical way in which it was presented by Yoda (and Obi-wan) makes me think that it wasn't meant to be a binary system in which a 'balance' must be maintained (like life & death), but that the Dark Side is a sort of perversion or sickness.

But then, the Dark Side is just too cool for that, and Dark Side characters are too interesting for there to be no place in the natural universe for them. I don't recall any of this 'bringing balance to the Force' in the Original Trilogy.

Also, as for Sith - my understanding is that the dark side characters like Vader and the Emperor represent only a legacy of an 'evil' Sith race, and its entirely different from the totalitarian rule of The Empire.
 
I'd like to say what great answers these are already. As Jessica Rabbit said, "I'm not bad. I'm just drawn that way," or written that way in the case of the Sith. I'd put it more simply, as John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton is quoted, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men." The Force brings great power and it must be hard to use such power responsibly. I also never understood the 'bringing balance to the Force' business either, because it seemed that Sith and Jedi were more in balance at the start of the prequel trilogy than they ever have been since (including in The Force Awakens) or, maybe that is the whole point.

One further observation though, the Sith are an élite. An élite is the most successful within any society at reaching commonly shared aims. The rest are convinced by the presence of the élite to aspire to be like them. However, barriers are placed by an élite to prevent others ever climbing to that level. (It is a closed group open only to a Sith Apprentice.) In addition, in the prequels, the Sith are being hunted by the Jedi. They would be fearful of the loss of their power, their wealth and their future status as an élite. They are fighting for their very survival. Yoda says that “Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” No wonder then, that the Sith are hateful and angry. We have never seen a time when the Force was in balance and there was no conflict.
 
A Sith is not necesarily evil to begin with - in the EU books a lost Sith Colony turns up, and they are mainly bad guys, but there's also a dreadful spiritual entity involved, iirc controlling them.

A proper Sith unlike a Jedi is encouraged to Love for example, they are taught to embrace their feelings and emotions, not suppress like the Jedi, it is technically possible to have a Sith who is not evil, there is no dark or light side of the Force, there is just the Force, it is the intent of the Force User that makes a difference - so a Sith who uses Rage and Anger to power Force Use is going to get corrupted, a Lightsaber is never good nor evil, it is a tool that can be used for evil or for good. I think part of the problem is that people attracted to the Sith tend to be power hungry, so of course, their use of the force is to do bad things. The novelisation of a New Hope even states at the beginning that Palpatine had once been a "good man" until he got a taste and a hunger for power.

In the Force Awakens, we don't even know if either Supreme Leader Snoke, or indeed Kylo Ren are "Siths" or if they are simply people who use the Force for Evil.

It's why Luke would have gone Dark had he actually struck the Emperor down, because it will have been out of Anger and Hatred, like I say, its intent - In the EU Books (I will put this in spoilers in case anyone is wading their way through)
Jacen Solo, Han and Leia's Eldest Son, and Twin Brother of their Daughter Jaina, Sword of the Jedi, falls to the Dark Side, for an identical reason as Anakin Skywalker, Jacen fell because of his love for his daughter, and a desire to bring order to the chaos and evil in the Galaxy so she can be safe, and he had an alien Sith, well she was some sort of dark user constantly whispering in his ear too, the way Palpatine was with Anakin. Dark Cadus as he becomes kills Mara Jade Skywalker, Luke's Wife, and attempts and comes bloody close to turning both Tahiri Veila (a young Jedi) and Luke & Mara's Son, Ben (also a Jedi, no surprise given his parents were probably the 2 most powerful Jedi in the galaxy)
And in the end, it has to be Jaina fighting her Twin Brother who ends him, the fact that Cadus killed his wife and nearly turned his son makes Luke completely compromised, if he went after Cadus, it would be out of anger and hate, and a desire for revenge, and we might get Cadus deposed, and then a Darth Luke on the throne. Jaina is able to fight him out of love and a hope to get her brother back, and of course, the sting in the tail is, she kicks his ass, he is severely and terminally injured, and before dying becomes Jacen once more, and I cant remember, its been so long, but I think his last words are begging her for forgiveness.

I don't believe Loving and having a partner is a direct path to turning Dark, the reason it's a problem for Jedi, is the training and attempts to suppress such feelings, sentient beings just aren't generally built to not love, so if Jedi were trained from the start how to manage their feelings and deal with terrifying concepts like loving your partner, or your child - the New Jedi Order founded by Luke Skywalker did not ban romantic unions like the Jedi of old, and pretty much the only one to go Dark was Jacen, so it's clear that just loving alone does not cause darkness, its the combination of love with someone manipulating you.
 
A Sith is not necesarily evil to begin with - in the EU books a lost Sith Colony turns up, and they are mainly bad guys, but there's also a dreadful spiritual entity involved, iirc controlling them.

EU is non-canon. Lucas allowed a lot of people to play in his sandbox, but they had to take their toys home with them at the end of the day.
 
EU is non-canon. Lucas allowed a lot of people to play in his sandbox, but they had to take their toys home with them at the end of the day.

Apart from the 25+ Years when they were :p And Disney are free too, and will borrow anything they fancy turning Canon.

My point stands regarding a Sith is not necessarily evil not at the start, as in Revenge of the Sith Palpatine tells Anakin the story of his own Master, Darth Plagueis. Palpatine was to every fibre of his being, nothing but hatred & evil, he had no ability to love. Yet his Master was so powerful, that he was able to manipulate midichlorians to keep the beings he cared about from dying. A useless power to Palpatine, a soulless creature like him has nobody to care about. But clearly, Plagueis, even as a Sith did love, and have an ability to care for some.

In theory, the midichlorian ability isn't even a dark power, saving from death is at least morally neutral I would think. Though of course that neutral power could turn a user Dark, if he used it for Dark intent, like keeping enemies alive to allow decades of horrific torture.

Even Force Lightning, is a morally neutral tool, a Jedi using it in defence of others for example isn't going to to wreak horror upon his physical body, he is wielding a tool, for the right reasons. Palpatine for example wrecks his body attacking people like Mace Windu with lightning, because he was using it in an attempt to murder, and channelling his rage, his hatred into the force to boost the ability.

There is very, very little Force Lore that is Canon, and much that went on in the EU wasn't trying to establish a new Force Lore, much of the stuff I talk about is simply the Authors having a good think about what we know from the Movies, and taking inferences and logical leaps. People have noticed for example, that Anakin's eyes don't go yellow until his final battle with Obi Wan in Revenge. Mind you, people keep assuming the Birth of the Sith Darth, Vader is when Palpatine anoints "Dark Knights" him. the Birth imo is the moment he leaves his mums corpse, and activates his lightsaber. (People often write or say "Sith Lord, Darth Vader, or Lord, Darth Vader" but what they are thus saying is Lord, Lord Vader! :whistle:

You only see him his body begin corruption right at the end, for the final battle with Obi Wan. Because his force abilities, his connection to the Force is now finally being driven by pure hatred, anger, and fear. No corruption such as yellow eyes even when he butchers the Younglings at the Jedi Temple, because as monstrous as it was, it was conventionally monstrous, he did not corrupt and misuse the Force to kill them, he did not even kill them out of hate or anger, he was doing a job, one vital he believes to protect the Galaxy and bring peace and safety, and he uses a non force tool to do it, his Saber. Had he been choking, or firing force lightning to murder them would have corrupted him physically.

I imagine it is one of the main reasons that Luke is hiding in Force Awakens, apart from feeling crushed, and in emotional pain and trauma at the butchery of Ren, and of losing his Nephew under his Guardianship and tutorage, had he stayed, he would be expected by the entire New Republic, including and especially his Sister and Brother in Law to go, and face Ren, and try to bring him home. And Luke knows there would be a battle, he is not going to turn up, look mournful, raise his hand out and give "please, Nephew, come home, we can get over this" a try, if Luke goes and faces him, his Nephew is going to come home either in a bacta tank, or a coffin, and with either result, it is not going to be Luke Skywalker going home, it is going to be a corrupted and fallen Jedi. Because just like with Jacen Solo/Darth Caedus in the EU, Luke IS going to have to fight his Nephew who isn't going to just wag his tail and follow his former Master home and Luke will be facing him in Anger, there's no way he could not, the Dark being he faces has destroyed everything he worked for, has presumably killed, perhaps potentially dozens of Jedi recruits, possibly even children. Obi Wan is bloody lucky his final fight with Anakin didn't turn him, but I suspect his love for the boy he was who pretty much, Jedi Master or not, is a son to him was much stronger than his hatred of the Sith he then had to fight.

It is interesting and perhaps notable I think that Kylo Ren is not showing any sign of physical corruption, so I think my theories hold out :p he has killed, but conventionally with his Saber, he hasn't channelled negative feelings into abusing the Force to use the twisted powers the use of which would leave a physical mark. Plus, the whole being tormented because he keeps feeling the mighty pull of "the light" stuff, at the moment, he IS saveable. I personally think that if we are going to see Luke dying in the new movies, it will be facing Ren, but refusing to fight him so he can't do anything to him out of anger.

I don't actually think the Supreme Leader is a Sith to be honest, unless Kylo is a name Ren has adopted for himself, it is an odd title to be granted, equally, I don't think the Arrogance and Ego of a Sith Lord would allow Snoke to give himself such a lowly title as "Supreme Leader" It sounds almost like the Imperial "Warlords" with delusions we got in the early EU, when the New Republic has taken Coruscant, and the Empire begins fragmenting through Civil War, power plays, backstabbing, and various Moffs, and Admirals begin going into business for themselves, and rebranding themselves with Lofty titles like "Grand Supreme Admiral" and "Supreme Moff" all the usual stuff little grey men who were often minor, barely competent civil servants or Captains of patrol vessels, out in the middle of nowhere who's reputation was "well, won't actually crash a ship he is Captaining... .probably" like to call themselves. :D Apart of course for Grand Admiral Thrawn who was a genuine military genius and commander.

I have always wondered how he knew the Vong were coming though. Weirdly the Star Wars Wiki, though I haven't checked what Wookiepedia has to say as thats the prime best go to resource normally, states that the Vong originated in another Galaxy, but they didn't, their race began on Zonama Sekot, a planet, (Zonama) which had somehow developed a sentient intelligence (Sekot) which was iirc somewhere in the Uncharted Regions, thus in the prime SW Galaxy.
 
Apart from the 25+ Years when they were :p And Disney are free too, and will borrow anything they fancy turning Canon.

My understanding is that Lucas did pick up some non-canon concepts (I don't have a reference for this, but search, there are lists of them out there), but that doesn't make anything else canon. Also, because of a dearth of materials, EU writers were sometimes directed to look at the materials produced by West End Games Star Wars RPG. Do you know of any source that quotes Lucas as say that EU stories are canon?

If it isn't in the source material though, it is not canon, and therefore a thought experiment based on someone else's thought experiments.

I am not saying that something being non-canon makes it any less enjoyable. There are loads of EU books and computer games which are really good, especially in filling out Dark Side mythology.

My point stands regarding a Sith is not necessarily evil not at the start, as in Revenge of the Sith Palpatine tells Anakin the story of his own Master, Darth Plagueis. Palpatine was to every fibre of his being, nothing but hatred & evil, he had no ability to love. Yet his Master was so powerful, that he was able to manipulate midichlorians to keep the beings he cared about from dying. A useless power to Palpatine, a soulless creature like him has nobody to care about. But clearly, Plagueis, even as a Sith did love, and have an ability to care for some.

What demonstration was there that Palpatine was telling the truth in the movie and not only him telling Anakin this story to entice him to the Dark Side and his cause?
 
Last edited:
The Sith are evil rather like orcs are evil in Lord of the Rings.

That is my major problem with fantasy. Thre is good and evil just for the sake of having a conflict for a story, there rarely seems to be any comprehensible point.

psik
 
I was under the impression that the EU were considered Canon, with George reserving the right to de canonify anything he fancied, and to use anything from the EU in the films, it's why the dismissing of the EU canon and rebranding them as "Myths" upset so many people, because they were supposed to be canon. Coruscant for example first appeared as the original planetary name of the world that was home to the Old Republic's Senate, reffered to in the original trilogy as "Imperial Center" renamed by Palpatine, in one of the early Zahn EU's in 1991.

The only rule in operation was that the EU could not contradict itself, and even more importantly, contradict the original trilogy and later the prequels.

If the EU were not being considered and generally understood by everyone to be canon, including by Lucasfilm, then why did Lucasfilm once purchased by Disney have to issue press releases stating that from this point, the entire EU was no longer canon?

George himself said in his introduction for Splinters of the Minds Eye in 1996:

"After Star Wars was released, it became apparent that my story—however many films it took to tell—was only one of thousands that could be told about the characters who inhabit its galaxy. But these were not stories that I was destined to tell. Instead, they would spring from the imagination of other writers, inspired by the glimpse of a galaxy that Star Wars provided. Today, it is an amazing, if unexpected, legacy of Star Wars that so many gifted writers are contributing new stories to the Saga."

That sounds like the Man himself being under the impression the EU was canon, it was contributing new stories to his Saga, it had his seal of approval and he was thrilled that the very detail light original trilogy had inspired such creativity. Were he not considering it Canon, it would surely be worded differently, like "it is amazing that so many gifted writers are creating a whole new giant and detailed universe and stories doing their own thing inspired by my original saga" subtle difference, but contributing to sounds like he considered it part of his Saga.

I don't know about tabletop RPG's, but the PC Games fed on, and were in turn fed upon the EU, it was all part of the canon, Kyle Katarn and Mara Jade from Dark Forces II for example were major figures throughout the Expanded Universe, until Mara's Murder by Jacen Solo / Darth Caedus. And it may not be canon now, but Disney are clearly feeding on the EU for ideas, which is cool. Kylo Ren is clearly Jacen Solo, and with Rey clearly being a seriously powerful Jedi, given that with no training and not really believing in the force, she was able to read the mind, and later, nearly kill in a Sabre fight a trained former Jedi, not to mention force influencing a stormtrooper, when Luke, with his ancestry could barely sense and swat sparks with a Sabre, whilst under instruction, I suspect she has been based strongly on Jaina Solo, though of course, not a Solo. I would not be surprised, if in film 2 or 3, we see Luke naming a Rey at her Knighting, if she gets any such thing as "Sword of the Jedi" the title he gave Jaina towards the end of the Vong War. Bonus points, if she has to kill Ren, and it takes place on a starship, and despite having years more experience, and presumably if he is beyond redemption, Ren will by now be using dark force powers, and yet still be totally outclassed, and will be badly injured, before monentarily coming back to himself, being the Jedi Ren, and asking for forgiveness, and then dies :whistle:

Another link, is according to the SW wikia, Ren was actually "christened" Ben, so not sure why Han called him Ren, since he was refusing to accept his son was beyond redemption. In the EU, Ben was Luke and Mara's Son. And was very nearly turned by Jacen/Caedus. There is some wonderful fanart from the EU around too, not to mention Cosplay!

I love this one, of Jaina cradling cradling Jacen's Corpse after the battle, because as I say, he came back the last moments, Jacen Wearing under his robe, the Armour of his own "Stormtroopers" the Galactic Alliance Guard.

he_was_jacen__not_caedus_____by_cindrollic.jpg

And The Sword of the Jedi, Leader during the Vong War, of Rogue Squadron, like her Uncle before her, and to the Vong, the living embodiment of their Trickster Goddess, Jaina Solo, wearing Stealth-X Wing flight outfit

Shea-Jaina-StealthX.jpeg
c4349971a52dfa568576f203acf0e86d.jpg

And, the same Cosplayer, as Jaina in standard New Republic X Wing flightsuit

Shea-Jaina-XW.jpeg
 
That is my major problem with fantasy. Thre is good and evil just for the sake of having a conflict for a story, there rarely seems to be any comprehensible point.

psik

In all fairness, you're describing bad or outdated fantasy. There are plenty of works out there that deal with complex themes and conflicts that hinge on cultural, political, or personal differences. It's easy enough to find books without evil overlords and empires of mindless cannon fodder.
 
That sounds like the Man himself being under the impression the EU was canon, it was contributing new stories to his Saga, it had his seal of approval and he was thrilled that the very detail light original trilogy had inspired such creativity. Were he not considering it Canon, it would surely be worded differently, like "it is amazing that so many gifted writers are creating a whole new giant and detailed universe and stories doing their own thing inspired by my original saga" subtle difference, but contributing to sounds like he considered it part of his Saga.

That's an interesting quote you pulled up, though I wonder if it wasn't in the original release of the book in 1978 (the Alan Dean Foster book, right?). I have it someplace.

Back then, there really wasn't so much thought put into canon / non-canon like we look at it now. But here's the thing - with loosely monitored shared universe works, it is too easy for different writers to pull it into multiple, different directions - not just expanding, but transforming and reinterpreting in ways that contradict each other, or are contrary to what is revealed in the original work. And if you accept that, then questions like "Are the Sith So Bad?" become rather meaningless. For example, consider - do any of the books acknowledge the events of Splinter of the Mind's Eye? What about the book where Chewbacca dies? Are they all arranged in a way that do not contradict each other? You can take that question and apply it to a single story sequence or run of stories among novels / games / comics / cartoons that have a collective history with each other, and and ask that question within that context.

"Are the Sith so Bad?" then becomes a question to address within a "sequence" rather than the whole. Because its clear that Lucas has varied over the years the amount of editorial control over the use of the Star Wars property. I wouldn't have imagined a novel popping up AFTER the prequels were released that kills off Chewbacca.

Star Trek has similar problems.
 
In all fairness, you're describing bad or outdated fantasy.

You mean, Lord of the Rings? I read it.

I read Star Wars before the movie came out and was telling people it was terrible before I saw it. That makes for a curious study between movies and literature. The movie was fun but I can't comprehend people who would watch it 20 times.

psik
 
There are several Canon errors between the EU, and the films and that were retconned in the Eu, but the rule was, that as well as the EU remaining internally Consistent, so the EU was not stories set in dozens of versions of the Starwars Galaxy, but there was the 1 Movies & EU Galaxy, the original trilogy and then the prequels are always the ultimate authority, so a canon error in an EU book based on something from the movies, the movies were always the correct interpretation, even if the movie canon error does not make sense.

I love the Witcher series, whether Novels or the PC Games series, though the Games tend to be extremely loyal to the novels, the major events in the games are official timeline from the novels, such as the Invasion of the North by the Nilfgaadians. A big reason for the love, apart from the sheer awesomeness, and humour, both normal and black, the Witcher world is not black and white it is various shades grey. A Witcher exists to protect Humanity from Monsters. But Geralt of Rivia through his adventuring comes to realise that his brief is wrong, and begins to operate a more realistic version. Just because a being looks like a Monster does not mean it is a threat to Humans, and some of the greatest monsters of all, wore a human face.

hence Geralt protects the Urcheon of Erlenwald from attempted murder by people loyal to the ruler of the Urcheon is a cursed Lord who during the day looks like a monster. Geralt has been hired to track him down and terminate as he is it seems a brutal "monster" who is trying to kidnap or attack Princess Pavetta. It turns out Pavetta is not being kidnapped at all, the Urcheon is simply a good man, who has been cursed to wear a monstrous face, a curse that would be ended on his wedding night, hence is supposedly attempting to claim his rights under the laws of Surprise. Calanthe who happily admits her Husband indeed made the promise is basically attempting to break his claim under the "law of Surprise" her now naturally deceased Husband was saved by the Urcheon who refused any reward except "whatever surprise you find when you get home now, you will give to me when I ask" to which the King agreed, gets home and finds Calanthe is pregnant with Pavetta. But as I say, the Urcheon is actually a good man, and has no intention of forcing Pavetta to leave and marry him, not even to end his awful curse. It turns out he and Pavetta have been meeting in secret and having gotten to know the man beneath the physical appearance has fallen madly in love with him.

And he has met and killed many Men who did things far more monstrous than any supposedly real Monster, many of which are just dumb animals. I cannot recall if its in the novels too, but in the Polish series (which in all fairness, is absolutely awful) Geralt refuses to help kill a Dragon, who some Lord wants to kill for the gold and kudos, but Geralt knows the Dragon has attacked noone, and would have been bloody surprised if it had.

Much Fantasy, even contemporary tends to be pretty black and white, which does not reflect the real world. In the original trilogy & prequels of Star Wars, the Sith iirc were comprehensively destroyed by the Jedi centuries before. I imagine when there were worlds full of them, there would have been members who were not necessarily evil, you cannot help where you are born. By the time of Palpatine, the few Sith still in existence are in pairs, a Master who corrupts and recruits an apprentice, who one day will murder the master, become the Master, and take an apprentice. At this point, its a totally underground thing that only attracts wicked people, or where a wicked person corrupts someone and makes them fall. Hence Vader even attempts to continue the tradition, wanting Luke to help him kill Palpatine, then the 2 of them shall rule, until one day, Luke will kill him, and take his own apprentice, its what the Sith have become.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top