#anti-acolyte

[rose-of-red-lake]

Unreliable Narrator in the Sith Show

I have seen a few arguments that the Acolyte is a case of total unreliable narration, that it's a new Star Wars era of storytelling, a "sophisticated" show from the "Sith's POV," which is why the Stranger/Qimir seems so calm, balanced, and sure of himself. But don't worry - according to these opinions, the modern audience will be able to see through his lies, being astute enough to know that he's evil, without having to tell us directly. Because telling us directly is too much of a mustache-twirling villain trope, or something.

So is everyone on the same page? Did we all get this?

Naur, I don think so... because I have also seen a lot of odd defenses of the character, that he's not really as bad as the Jedi make him out to be, that he's not a Sith, and that he wants to be left alone as a rogue, without any allegiances, just doing whatever he wants, whenever he wants. I have seen people agree with his perspective, that the Jedi are the oppressors because they won't let him live how he wants. Someone even compared him to Mando with Osha as his Grogu. Man just wants a family without the government telling him how to live his lyfe. 😥

So if audiences are indeed smart enough to see through the unreliable narrator, why are they agreeing with him? Why are people sucked into his own perspective, which is Ayn Rand on steroids to my mind. Running through the galaxy, doing whatever you want? Okay, but look where that led. Once he wanted an acolyte to go out into the world and assassinate some Jedi, he isn't like Brendock or Dathomir witches anymore. That should have been a line, drawn, clear to the audience. But then the narrative goes back to extreme moral relativism. "Well, maybe the Jedi shouldn't have interfered..." or, "Maybe they were right to." So we have morally grey situations with a baddie POV mixed in, in a television show where we can't get inside people's heads? Okaaaay...Leysle with a Y. Good luck with that.

If this is all just unreliable narration, why is Sol so unsympathetic, unwilling to ask for forgiveness, even right up to the end? This just makes Osha look justified for killing him. The Dark Side doesn't even need to be "seductive" if Sol's actions were so bad. And I'm taking his actions that way because of what the showrunner said about him: Sol has a darkness in him that he can't control. And what was the content of this darkness, you might wonder? Well, he was being more like a "father" than a "Jedi" again according to Headland. Alright, why are those two roles mutually exclusive, at all? Doesn't her own mentor Feloni criticize Obi-Wan for not being enough of a father to Anakin?

But maybe the unreliable narration could come through with how the Order is portrayed in their scenes without Qimir. But nope, they're like the freaking police department in the Wire: cold, calculating, trying to cover things up. If it was an unreliable narrator, wouldn't we have a break in all of the bleakness that shows us, hey "Qimir is kinda wrong here." I don't think we do.

Beyond any of this, I don't trust this writer to write something as complex as a "Sith POV," or use unreliable narration effectively. I don't think she's experienced enough.

Not to mention, I don't think the showrunner gets the emotional turmoil of what its like to be a Dark Side user. They should be lost in their emotions, letting their emotions rule them, subject to constant turmoil, constant fear of losing what they have, and wanting more and more because of their greed. The unreliable narration should break at some point to show that, and it shouldn't be so subtle that it goes over people's heads. Moreover, a Jedi like Sol should be more sympathetic because they are at least struggling to suppress their inner Dark Side. Sol did nothing like what Anakin did. If he is truly acting like a overly-compassionate father, then he shouldn't refuse to ask for her forgiveness either. He shouldn't be dead in the mud, choked by his own daughter.

Goddamn this show is fucking bleak.

[greencheekconure27]

Methinks we fans of cancelled shows need to gather together and ritually sacrifice Emily in Paris to the Devil* to get our next seasons.

Willow, Renegade Nell, Dead Boy Detectives, KAOS, The Artful Dodger, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency, The Acolyte, Lockwood & co, Warrior Nun, October Faction, who else wants to join?

(*or other entity of your choice.

Seriously why is this the show that's getting a fourth (!!!) season?)

[short-wooloo]

Now that the trailer is out, it's probably best that I get this out of the way before acolyte releases

The Jedi are right about the Force and the dark side

The Jedi did not lose their way

The Jedi were not corrupted

The genocide of the Jedi was not their fault

The Jedi are not wrong for being part of the Republic, it is in fact a good thing

The Jedi are not arrogant for thinking the sith are gone

and while we're at it the sith are evil, always, end of discussion

The Jedi do not steal children

If someone wants to leave the Jedi, that's allowed, no one will stop them

The Jedi are right about attachment

Attachment is not love (SW uses the Buddhist definition because Lucas is a Buddhist and the Jedi are based off Buddhist monks, Buddhism defines attachment as being possessive or unwilling to let go of people or things)

The Jedi do not forbid emotions, they forbid being controlled by your emotions, you must control them

The Jedi are not forbidden from loving people, nor are they celibate, they just can't get married (big whup) because their duties must come first

Being peacekeepers doesn't preclude the Jedi from fighting in war, sometimes to keep the peace you have to fight back, especially when its against tyranny, see WWII (or Ukraine today)

Gray jedi are not a thing

The Jedi are not slavers or complicit in slavery

Oh and of course, the Jedi are not elitists for not training non Force sensitives, (Han voice) that's not how the Force works, dave filoni broke the rules so he could shoehorn sabine into a Jedi (to give the benefit of the doubt, I do believe sabine's role as ahsoka's apprentice was meant for an original character but things got condensed by executives, so maybe filoni isn't entirely to blame here)

(Edit)

The Jedi are not cops

The Jedi are not the government/the rulers of the Republic/galaxy

The Jedi do not persecute other Force groups

Padawans are not child soldiers

Feel free to add anything I forgot

Do not, DO NOT!! add anything Jedi critical, I'm done with it and won't hear it, don't have something nice to say? Then go away, I will block on sight, either reblog without comment (either in the reblog or the notes) or don't interact at all

[antianakin]

It seems like the height of arrogance to look at a story like Star Wars with some of the most blatantly obvious and evil villains in the history of sci-fi/fantasy and when asked "What went wrong to cause the situation we see in the main story" the answer isn't "the villains were working for years to undermine the heroes from the shadows piece by piece until they were able to topple everything and murder everyone" but, somehow, "the heroes were actually the REAL villains all along because they have a religion they follow and don't immediately believe everything they're told point blank."

[allgirlsareprincesses]

Choosing the Beast: Modern Folklore Heroines Embrace the Animal Husband

“I choose the bear.” The refrain rang out across the web, with many a woman nodding in agreement or at least understanding, and certain men huffing with indignant outrage. Just a meme, really, but did it speak to a deeper truth? Is it merely age-old mistrust of patriarchy talking, or a true desire for the beastly, the wild, the untame?

I’m no sociologist, of course, but I have noticed an emerging trend in fem-gaze media that seems to reflect this view. In movies like I Am Dragon (2015) and recent shows like My Lady Jane and The Acolyte, the heroine chooses the beast, loving her animal husband in his wild form rather than requiring him to transform back into a mundane man to earn her affection. This is such a departure from the typical folktale pattern that it’s difficult to even find an historic example where this occurs.

Commonly thought to reveal the desire to tame a dangerous mate in a patriarchal society, most animal husband tales (ATU 425a) feature a hero who ultimately transforms permanently into a human. This is viewed not only as freeing him from the maddening effect of his wild form, but also saving his bride from committing the sin of bestiality. In these tales, the animal mate’s transformation is necessary for the salvation of both.

Is the modern heroine then damned by choosing her husband’s beastly form? Or does she actually free them both from the yoke of patriarchal expectations?

Bathing: Discovering the Wild Masculine

The first motif that stands out in these modern screen examples is bathing. In animal spouse tales, there is often a dynamic of the hunter and the hunted, and thus a moment when the hunter comes upon their would-be lover unawares. Perhaps they find the animal spouse sleeping, or they cast a light on them unexpectedly, see them without their animal skin or disguise, and so on. And of course, they often come upon the lover at their bath.

There is an implied eroticism in this discovery, finding one’s quarry not only undressed, but also in the most private of activities. Water of course symbolizes fertility, but bathing is also purifying, symbolically washing away all that might make a mate undesirable. And this, perhaps, is the reason that historically this motif is used almost exclusively for animal brides, not animal husbands.

For the animal husband, he either actively chooses to reveal himself to the bride (perhaps on their wedding night), or she violently strips away his disguise, often armed with “flame and steel” like Psyche and her many avatars. Animal brides on the other hand are nearly always discovered at a body of water, bathing. The hunter will then capture her either by stealing her animal skin or cloak, or by placing his own clothing on her. What does it mean, then, when it is the husband who is discovered bathing in a body of water, held as an erotic object in the feminine gaze?

In The Acolyte, Osha follows Qimir to a pool where he slowly undresses, in full knowledge that she is watching. On the shore, she steals his lightsaber, just like the hunter who steals the animal skin, symbolically claiming him. When he emerges, Qimir dons new clothes, as if acknowledging that he is a different person than before he entered the water, almost purified in a way. Osha is forced to confront that there is more to the murderer in the mask than she realized.

Similarly, in My Lady Jane, our heroine goes looking for Guildford just before sunrise on their ill-fated wedding night, only to discover him bathing in the stables. The scene is gratuitously filmed from Jane’s (very horny) perspective, flipping the script on the countless scenes in screen history shot with the masculine gaze. Immediately after she discovers and confronts him, Guildford transforms against his will into a horse, and Jane realizes that he is an Ethian, a creature she has been taught is demonic and unnatural.

And in I Am Dragon, Mira makes several discoveries in quick succession: first, she deduces that Arman is actually the dragon. In the next moment, she slips from the island’s peak and falls, saved only when Arman transforms at the last moment and breaks her fall with his dragon form. The water begins to wash over his unconscious body, and at first Mira thinks that she will allow him to drown. But the sight of Arman in his human form after he rescued her, worried over by his animal familiar, stirs her to pity and she wraps him in a sail and drags him to safety. In this way, she clothes him, claiming him as her own.

Each of these heroines discovered a new aspect of her husband at the bath, finding him unexpectedly alluring, and ultimately choosing to begrudgingly claim him. Each animal husband tried to wash away his beastly form, to separate himself from the wild masculine. These men feel a sense of disassociation from a part of themselves, but now that their brides have discovered it, there will be no more hiding. Further, the bride now holds the power in the relationship, evidenced by how her husband needs her: Qimir needs Osha to be his apprentice, Guildford needs Jane to help him “break the curse,” and Arman needs Mira to heal him from his wounds.

Playing House: The Half-Husband

The second feature of these stories is a period of domesticity for the couple. For a brief time after the husband’s beastly nature is revealed, the lovers “play house” like children. While sexual tension is present, they typically do not consummate their union during this time, but instead cook, eat, rest, and care for one another. What’s more, they ignore or even attempt to actively destroy the husband’s animal form. They deny that this is part of him and therefore part of their relationship.

In I Am Dragon, Mira heals Arman, and wakes the next morning to find he has left food for her (dragonfruit, appropriately). Together they begin building a home out of shipwreck debris they find scattered around the island. A cheery montage shows them decorating a living space, choosing clothes, playing music, and dancing. But the specter of Arman’s monstrous form lurks on the edge of their idyllic life. Mira has nightmares, and tells Arman how much she fears “the dragon,” notably not referring to them as the same person. And eventually, it emerges that Mira has been planning to escape, rejecting Arman’s dragon form entirely.

After he sheds the helmet and robes of The Stranger, Qimir turns his attention to caring for Osha: he heals her, lets her sleep in his bed, provides clothes, and cooks for her. In turn, after some lightsaber-wielding, Osha becomes more comfortable in his home and accepts the food he offers, eventually even trying on his helmet. Later, they bicker amiably on their way to Brendok, like an old married couple on a road trip. When not facing down Jedi, Qimir leaves his menacing persona behind and transforms into an empathetic, protective, and alluring partner.

Jane Grey, meanwhile, finds herself using her honeymoon sequestered away in a private cottage to try to cure Guildford of his Ethianism. With her knowledge of medicine, she concocts various potions and magical cures, but none of them succeed. Guildford often checks in on her after these disappointments, making sure she’s getting enough sleep and taking care of herself. It’s also clear that they’ve been regularly dining together when Jane suddenly dashes off to rescue her friend. Guildford follows her and the two protect one another, followed by an almost-tryst. Even when they move into the palace, their day-to-day (or rather night-to-night) life is one of comfortable domesticity, although they continue to deny Guildford’s horse form.

In each of these cases (although less so in The Acolyte without Season 2 to continue the story), playing house can only last for so long while the husband’s animal nature is denied. There is a part of him that is suppressed, rejected, and this leads to him being incomplete, a half-husband. Each hero is unable or unwilling to accept and celebrate his whole self with his bride. Eventually, it is that denial that leads to a rift between the couple, which can only be healed not with the transformation of the husband, but with the embrace of his animal form.

Enforcing Patriarchy: The Rival

Each of these relationships exists in direct opposition to the dominant culture in the story: Arman as the Dragon is the literal enemy of Mira’s people, Qimir as Sith is the enemy of Osha’s Jedi masters, and in My Lady Jane, intermarriage between humans and Ethians is punishable by death. By choosing to stay with their animal husbands, even for a brief time, our heroines are openly defying the patriarchal norms of their societies. But no oppressive society is about to take that transgression lying down. In each story, a rival emerges to enforce the patriarchal order, kill the beastly husband, and retrieve the bride.

In I Am Dragon, Mira’s betrothed and descendent of the dragon-slayer, Igor, journeys to rescue her from the dragon. Over the course of the story, it becomes clear that Igor cares nothing for Mira herself, and merely feels entitled to her as his bride. Dragon-slaying is his heritage, so he must find her, kill the dragon, and take his place as the hero of his people. Even the marriage ceremony illustrates his ownership of her: he takes hold of a rope tied to her boat and reels her in, thus binding her to the patriarchal order. Contrast that to Arman, who offers her the power of flight, a symbol for freedom.

In Osha’s case, Qimir’s rival for her loyalty is clearly Master Sol, who wants to keep his former pupil dependent on him and the Jedi. Sol takes patronizing fatherliness to an extreme, constantly rescuing Osha rather than letting her stand for herself, teaching her to deny her feelings and instincts, and lying to her to “protect” her. The Jedi refuse to allow that there might be any other way to access the Force than their own, thus invading the home of the Brendok witches and ultimately orphaning the twins. Sol continues to press this dominance to the end, challenging Qimir and insisting to Osha that his own lies were justified.

In My Lady Jane, there are two rivals, both women. Lady Frances attempts throughout the show to dominate her daughters and crush their wills, forcing them into unwanted marriages, applying political pressure, and even counseling Jane to abandon Guildford to save herself. The other rival is Mary Tudor, who is determined not only to emulate her father’s violent, oppressive, and misogynistic reign, but to crush anyone she considers “unnatural” or who poses a threat to her rule. These characters stand as clear examples of how women can enforce patriarchy, too.

In each story, there is a moment when the rival briefly recaptures or “rescues” the bride from her beastly husband, bringing her to a moment of decision: will she stay within the bounds of patriarchy like a good little girl? Or will she make an act of defiance to choose her own path?

Marriage: Choosing the Beast

The bride’s choice will ultimately decide not only her fate, but that of her mate as well. As an independent character, the wild masculine is deeply wounded, separated from himself and thus from his bride. He longs to transform not into a greater, more whole person, but into a lesser, half-person. Alone, without the embrace of his anima, he cannot see the value of his beastly form. Instead of healing, he faces annihilation.

As a part of the bride’s psyche, the beastly husband represents her innermost desires, the truth of her heart, and a spirit freed from the expectations of her society. He is her animus, her missing wild masculine. If she transforms him into a man, then she will tame his wild nature, bringing him to heel under the boot of the patriarchy. Choosing the human form and rejecting the beast means rejecting her own psychological needs. It would be just another form of psychic dismemberment.

Fortunately and unusually, each of these modern brides chooses her beastly husband without demanding he transform. When Osha finally agrees to become Qimir’s apprentice, she takes his hand under the willow tree, clasping the newly-bled lightsaber between them. A few scenes later, this wedding imagery is repeated when they hold hands over the saber again, this time looking into a sunrise/set. Notably, at the moment they “marry” under the willow tree, Qimir is wearing his beastly helmet with rows of menacing, wolfish teeth. He has not come to the light side or shed his Dark Side persona, but Osha has embraced him anyway without fear. And while they might not both be healed (yet), they are more whole together than they were apart.

When her efforts to cure Guildford of his Ethianism repeatedly fail, Jane begins to suspect that his “condition” cannot be cured at all. But listening to her Ethian friends Susanna and Archer finally convinces her that the truth is Guildford doesn’t NEED to be healed - being an Ethian is who he is, and it’s nothing to fear. Unfortunately, Guildford still associates his beastly form with his mother’s death, so he is unable to accept it as Jane encourages, and flees. After a near-death experience, he uses his equine speed to return to the castle just as Jane is deposed and captured. As our heroes battle toward the end, Guildford comes to learn that there are many other proud Ethians, and that his family loves and accepts him in any form.

Still, he’s unable to transform at will, and when Mary captures him and sentences both husband and wife to death, it seems their story may end in tragedy. But as Guildford has been struggling to accept himself, Jane too has been battling with her own conscience. Does she renounce Guildford to save herself? Use her wits to kill the guard and escape? Bend to her mother’s manipulation? Jane confronts each temptation, and ultimately chooses to face death rather than betray Guildford or herself. But when her Ethian friends (the wild instinct) appear to disrupt the execution, our heroine seizes the opportunity to rescue Guildford. Unable to free him from the burning pyre, she confesses her love for him, and they kiss amid the flames.

Fire is often a herald of transformation, burning away illusions to reveal the truth. And when Jane and Guildford exchange their vows in this symbolic marriage ceremony, Guildford’s fears and illusions are finally burned away. Now that his bride has accepted his beastly form, he can accept it too, and so he at last transforms at will into a horse so that they can escape. Their story ends with them married and whole before the sunrise.

Among our modern heroines, Mira is the boldest in her embrace of the beastly husband. Offered yet again as a bride to Igor, she realizes that this is not what she wants, and casts off the tether from her boat. She declares “I love the Dragon!” using the name of her husband’s animal form rather than his human name. Then, she sings the song that will call the dragon to her, and he appears to carry her away again.

But their story is not over yet! Earlier in the story, Arman told Mira of how he loses control when in dragon form, and that dragons are compelled to reproduce by burning maidens to death and retrieving their offspring from the ashes. Returning to the island with her a second time, the dragon drops her on the altar and prepares to spew fire, but Mira lunges up and kisses him. This act of love, even when he is a monster, stuns the beastly husband. Again, Mira declares her love and kneels before him, saying she does not wish to be parted. We might expect the animal husband to transform in this moment, but instead he lays his fearsome head in her lap as a lover. Their story ends with a child and a flight in the sky, silhouetted by the sun just like the other couples.

Each bride, when confronted with the option to return to the patriarchal limits of her childhood, chose instead an act of love and acceptance for her wild masculine. This embrace helped the beastly husband to accept his whole self, and he is healed without having to cut off the wild parts of himself.

What Does It Mean?

Again, this story is so rare in world folklore that it’s difficult to even find examples. On fleeting occasions that the woman chooses an untransformed beast, it is presented as a cautionary tale. These women are framed as a danger to the community for their bestial impulses and abandonment of the social order, much like witches who were said to consort with the devil. It was certainly never presented as a happy ending, insofar as we can tell from written accounts.

So what does the emergence of this tale mean for our culture? I would argue that this is just the latest step in our ongoing reckoning with historic gender roles, as well as renegotiating with other forms of systemic oppression. People of all genders are pressured to reject a part of ourselves, cutting us off from our own truth and desires that run counter to the enforced social order. We must not challenge patriarchy, must not embrace different gender expressions, must not blur established hierarchies of power, must not find joy and power in our identities, and so on.

This enforced denial does tremendous damage to everyone caught in the system, and so through story, we dream our way to escape. We dream of embracing the dark, wild parts of ourselves, of flying free on a spaceship or a dragon or enchanted horseback, and of being totally loved for who we are.

It’s clear patriarchy is still fighting back against this emancipation of the wild feminine and wild masculine, given that both The Acolyte and My Lady Jane were canceled not long after their release. In the case of The Acolyte in particular, there was a sustained campaign from its announcement to harass and silence the creators. Demoralizing as this phenomenon may be, it’s important to remember WHO ultimately owns these stories:

“Fanfiction is a way of the culture repairing the damage done in a system where contemporary myths are owned by corporations instead of owned by the folk.

-Henry Jenkins, NYT 1997

Ah, an oldie-but-goodie. But Dr. Jenkins is right. Corporations may greenlight, film, release, and then cancel these stories, but ultimately they belong to the people. We take from these tales what speaks to us, leave what does not, and then retell them ourselves in fanfiction, in art inspired by the stories, and in lessons we pass on to our friends and families. If the embrace of the wild masculine speaks to you, let the story take root in your own life. Do you know someone who needs to be embraced, just as they are? Do you need to accept the parts of yourself that society tells you to hate? Do you want to be free, healed, and whole?

If so, then let these stories show you how, and tell more like them. Embrace the beast, and find your joy.

Sources:

Beauty and the Beast Tales From Around the World by Heidi Anne Heiner

In Search of the Swan Maiden: A Narrative on Folklore and Gender by Barbara Fass Leavy

And a relevant song for you, as a treat:

Women Who Run With the Wolves: Myths and Stories of the Wild Woman Archetype by Clarissa Pinkola Estés, Ph.D.

[intermundia]

ultimately the acolyte was interesting to me in the sense that it was such a bizarre combination of love and disdain for the source material. you can't accuse it of hating canon, as it felt like it was written with wookieepedia tabs open, and peppered liberally with references from cortosis to plagueis. the details were all there, the dynamic action scenes were there. but fundamentally the spirit of the show rejected the heart of star wars in lieu of telling a transformative story with divergent values. it was such an angry show, resentful and accusatory, full of liars and hypocrites, showing hope to be false and trust to be foolish. it spat at the jedi and snarled and criticized them, killed him and blamed them for dying, all with plausible deniability from unreliable narrators, sure, but just how long does a group need to be under siege from all directions to feel openly condemned by the storytellers? the story had more positive things to say about a sexy and sympathetic dark side, like darth nobody brutally cut down a padawan and still got the girl in the end. the coven got to be a family while the temple was called a cult and a cold institution. it just broke the worldbuilding, like the good guys weren't actually good, and the bad guys weren't actually bad, something which would be absolutely fine in pretty much any other media franchise, but this is ostensibly star wars? it was just a very strange combination and not one that landed particularly well to me.

[jaydude1992]

Currently recalling someone who claimed that part of the backlash for The Acolyte came from Jedi stans angry that the Jedi weren't depicted as being flawless and perfect. I don't know the extent to which I can speak for anyone else, but I like to think we probably wouldn't be complaining as much if;

Headland didn't act like she was writing the show in accordance with Lucas's original intentions, only to make up flaws for the Jedi that never existed in the stuff he was involved with (seriously, the Jedi of Lucas's works are perfectly allowed to have emotions and feelings, and they DEFINITELY don't persecute other groups of Force-users just for existing).

We hadn't already endured decades of "jedi-critical"/"anti jedi" works by people whose criticisms of the Jedi come largely from them misinterpreting and/or deviating from Lucas's narrative.

The Sequel Trilogy hadn't denied us a Jedi Order rebuilt by Luke for the apparent sake of trying to replicate New Hope.

Personally, I say that by all means, give us Jedi that have flaws and aren't perfect. No-one enters the Jedi Order with the experience and wisdom necessary to be a Jedi Master, after all. But if you're going to claim your work to be a natural extension of Lucas's stuff - as opposed to a deviation from it - those flaws and imperfections have to be consistent with what we see in the latter.

[twilighttitties]

Looking back at the reaction to reylo was so insane like the way you bitches acted like if the two space wizard kissed the domestic violence rates would go up 😭 truly hellish times

[rose-of-red-lake]

Fiction writing and worldbuilding in Star Wars comes with a certain responsibility. Posing moral dilemmas for individuals or groups and letting audiences decide which character is right or wrong is definitely interesting and important. But when a major plot event is the whole world going full Nazi, it's important to ask, is this punching down? For example, take a group demonized by fascists, mix in some morally grey writing, and see how it sounds:

"Immigrants at the border: a closer look into a good, but flawed, group of people: were they right or wrong to enter the country illegally?"

"Academics and Academia: A few bad apples or is the whole institution rotten from the inside? Dogmatic elitists or helpful guides? You decide!"

And with Star Wars:

"Jedi: supposedly these Buddhist monks serve the galaxy for free: but do they really serve it? Maybe they do, maybe they don't! Corruption, lies, and cult behavior: yes or no? We'll give you plenty of scenes to justify both sides!"

By all means, write individuals in all colors of the moral rainbow in any other medium, give them flaws, but I think there should be more caution with political world building. The end conclusions shouldn't bolster fascist scapegoating. Be responsible.

That's why I'm cringing at this new show. It's supposed to be set some 100 years before Palpatine. We're close enough in the timeline that his Master makes an appearance. Morally ambiguous writing with a villain protagonist in a universe where a Nazi Galaxy is right around the corner is certainly a choice.

I don't know if there is more writing advice around this area (if so, please recommend in the comments!), but there are some excellent non-fiction authors who study fascism and are doing good work: Ruth Ben-Ghiat, Masha Gessen, Anne Applebaum, Timothy Snyder, Jeanelle K. Hope.

[the-pineapple-cake]

Well done Palpatine, your Anti-Jedi propaganda is so good that even some of us are starting to believe it.

[short-wooloo]

I really hate that "eventually one of you is going to snap" bit, because it's obviously referring to Anakin while completely misunderstanding the point of Anakin

Anakin did not snap because he was forced to control his emotions (I mean you could say he snapped with the tuskens, but that's him snapping because he stopped trying to control himself), he chose the dark side, that's how it works, the dark side is not some thing you do subconsciously and have no control of and is therefore "not reeeeeaaaaally evil" (as headland so obviously believes), it's a choice, it's evil, it's giving up on being in control and indulging in your baser desires

Really Anakin only snapped AFTER he turned to the dark side, when he lost his shit and started strangling Padme, when he had already betrayed the Jedi/Republic, murdered children, and destroyed democracy

The idea that he snapped just seems like more of that "he wasn't really in control of himself therefore he's not culpable for his actions" crap

[ankahikoibaat]

[IMAGE TEXT: a thread of two posts from ‘aradhna.’ @/thebitterbeast.bsky.social.

POST ONE: me whenever it is clear either via marketing, interviews or the media itself that yet another Star Wars writer/director is ignoring the Buddhist and other Eastern influences on the Jedi to portray them as a flavour of Christian/Catholic and/or an institution not a religious order of monks:

POST TWO: *looks at said media* oh so this is just licensed fanfic then.

(hey Disney if you're just licensing fanfic now, I can direct you to some great ones that actually respect the real life religions and cultural influences of the main draw to Star Wars. heck, I wrote some!)]

[antianakin]

The argument that a story from a villain's perspective HAS to show the heroes in a bad light seems like such a small-minded way of looking at things. It is in fact possible to do a story from the point of view of a villain where the good guys are turned into antagonists without making the good guys "the evil institution" or "dogmatic" or being genuinely CRITICAL of the good guys. It is in fact possible to make a story about the bad guys without saying that the whole point of the source material is that the good guys were bad all along.

It just requires a good writer with some creativity and a solid understanding of the themes and messages of the franchise.

[klerothesnowman]

The Sith are Nazis and it's never been subtle

This one ended up being really long. I spliced in some images when I could to break it up easier.

One of the things that causes the most friction in the world is the idea of morality. I know, that's the most water is wet statement ever said but I think people really miss just how much the nuance of morality goes over people's heads. Subjective, objective, relative, from a baseline we understand that there are different types of morality but I don't think people really grasp how much a persons personal morality can be wildly different to any another given person's, especially among people who share spaces like fandoms. Morality is shaped by personal experiences, there are personal experiences that are 99% ubiquitous among humanity like "Pain" that form the basis of everyone's moral compass, then there are the major cultural touchstones that no matter what your morality will be affected by, religion, nation, race, all that what have you. Everyone has an opinion on the Christian Church and that opinion is informed by your morals. People who have been abused by members of a church will have a very different view of the morality of a religion compared to people who have been raised Catholic compared to someone who was raised agnostic compared to someone raised agnostic and is queer compared to someone who has been raised Catholic and is queer compared to someone who has been raised Catholic and is queer and is also rich and so on and so forth you get it.

Morality is not a binary thing, and it's not a nine point grid either D&D, it's more like one of those circle charts that Jojo Stands get ranked on. You know the ones that always seem to show up in anime? I don't know what they're called. Except instead of a circle it's more like a ball, and everyone has this horrible looking 3D balls covered in bumps and spikes and dips and holes.

Why am I opening this ramble with a ramble about morality and religion? Because I'm on tumblr. When I decide I want to ramble about something I read the tags and see what the vibe is, see what people are saying about things. I'm not part of the "Fandom", I don't know the discourses, I see that there's Anti-Jedi and Pro-Jedi and "Stanikins" and all of these different labels and battlelines, and then I read about how people on either side are feeling attacked and harassed by people on other sides. I have no idea how real this is, I have no idea what kind of minefield I'm about to walk into. I'm just rambling about my thoughts and feelings about Star Wars because I like it and I'm a little extra aware that this one is going to ruffle feathers.

Because people are fuckin' worked up about Jedi. There are people who are making it part of their identity that they are anti-Jedi. And it's been happening for years, decades even. Because the experiences and trends of nerd culture has been pushing against systems and religion since I was a baby. Nerds being obnoxious atheists and smugly telling people "God isn't real" was basically the norm when I was a teenager, and before I was born nerds were dealing with being called evil and satanic. Nothing I'm rambling about here is new, in fact using D&D as a touchstone I think the current trend for nerddom's interaction with religion is ambivalence, despite faith and divine power being such an important part of D&D, there's basically zero interaction with divinities in 5e, and when there is it's hostile and has an asterisk against it. I'll do a ramble about this one day too

But the Jedi stuff is interesting to me, because there's a lot of directions people come at for it.

There's people who argue against just Jedi because they're a religion. There's people who argue the Jedi are slavers or kidnap children. People think Jedi are super beings who lord over everyone with their power. People think the Jedi force people to suppress their emotions and personhood. There are people who think Jedi are moral supremacists who silence and kill anyone who thinks about the Force differently from them.

I have some "Pro-Jedi" arguments to make but I'll save them for a different ramble, because this one's supposed to be about another group of people.

The people who think, from their point of view, the Jedi are evil.

The reason I rambled on so much about people being Anti-Jedi is because very often, these people end up being Pro-Sith. It's an obvious leap, if the Jedi are the problem then the people opposed to the Jedi might have the right idea. If your issue with the Jedi is that they disallow "Attachment", then here's the Sith who are all about Attachment. If your issue with the Jedi is that they suppress their emotions then here's the Sith who are always tapping into their emotions. There is an immediate appeal there.

Then there's the Sith Code, let's give it a read.

Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.

Pretty sweet, Passion is pretty positive, breaking chains and freedom. I can get behind that. The rest of Sith Philosophy is pretty swell too. It's about improvement through conflict. Your struggles make you stronger, makes you better, removes your shackles and lets you be free, but also recognizes that you will have to do whatever it takes to do so. The Jedi seek to wipe out the dark knowledge you attain, so you must sequester yourself and hide when you must hide, and strike when you must strike. It's stance could be summed up as something like... "The sacred mission of a Sith is to preserve the Sith Order's most valuable elements as you raise yourself to a dominant position, and all who do not are chaff."

There are people who are really into this. Like, really, really into this. They talk about how they apply this mentality to their real life. They describe themselves as Sith. There are also people who are only kind of into this, they think about positive Sith characters and make headcanons about the good things Sith do.

I need to stress, for those people, that what I am about to say is not hyperbole. I will provide sources.

The Sith Code and Philosophy is Nazi Propaganda. It is literally lifted from Mein Kampf. That quote I used to sum it up is a paraphrased quote from Britannica.com. That's Hitler.

The Sith Code was invented to be in opposition to the Jedi Code, its purpose is to twist a preexisting code to make you think the alternative isn't so bad and it uses codephrases to do so.

Passion, Strength, Victory, Chains, being Free, these are words that we have presubscribed meanings for, but what do they mean in the Sith Code? What IS Passion? What IS Strength? What IS Victory?

Most people I interact with see Passion as Love, passionate, exciting love, the exact thing the Jedi reject. But that can't be it, where's Palpatine's love? Where's Maul's? Where's Vader's?

Passion is obsession. The kind of obsession that will lead you to burning everything down if you don't get what you want. It's not letting anything stand between you and your goal, even if that thing is your goal itself.

Let's break the code down here.

Peace is a lie, there is only passion. We start with the obvious twist on the Jedi code, an immediate refutation of the Jedi's first line. It stands in opposition.

Through passion, I gain strength. We've already done Passion, it's a nice little dressing up of "Being a raging psycho"

Through strength, I gain power. Strength is often intermingled with power, but it's often spoken of interchangably with being able to set aside morals. The Sith isn't an amoral monster who just killed a bunch of kids, he's just STRONG enough to do what needed to be done

Through power, I gain victory. Power isn't a code word. Power is Power, Power is what it's all about and there's no hiding it. In the Sith way the only thing that matters is that you are powerful enough to kill your rivals and stand on top.

Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me. I think the notions of breaking chains and being Free is the cleverest part of the Sith Code's propaganda kit. It's still seeing use in The Acolyte and it's still convincing people that the Sith are right, even when the guy who's calling for freedom mercs a child then and there.

The Sith are not misunderstood heroes. They're Nazis. They're facist might makes right would be autocrats trying to convince you they're right so you'll validate them and prove them right.

Sith Philosophy is self defeating. Following the Sith Code means you need to define yourself on your conflict, meaning your conflict can never end. For all its claims of being free and breaking chains you can never be free of what drives you or you will lose the strength it gives you. To break your chains you need to hold onto them tight, and you can never let them go.

[my-star-war-sblog]

Imma be for real for a moment here, the fandom's and newer Star Wars media's treatment of the Jedi genuinly killed of any interest I had in it. I mean, why should I keep being invested in a media that continuously keeps shitting on my favorite characters and tries to make them worse than they are? What reason do I have to continue interaction with a fandom that's not only toxic as hell but also irrationally hates my favorite characters? And ontop of that keeps harassing anyone who does like them about how "wrong" they are? I used to genuinly enjoy Star Wars, but now? Now it's like this one estranged uncle that used to be cool in your childhood until he fell into some weird politics. All I have left over for the media and his fandom is mild disgust and annoyance. And that sucks! Because I used to really like that stuff. And I'd have loved it if I was able to continue liking it. But with the way it's going right now I really can't.

[darthteeth]

good morning🙂‍↕️