SPECULATION Is Luke Rey's Father? - The Evidence For and Against

Judging from the film, novel and other material, I wouldn't say that Solo is impossible, but it's rather unlikely. Again, Lucas was super original, but do you really think Disney want to rub fans the wrong way by having a take on Jacen/Jaina proxies?

I think she's a Skywalker. I also think the potential story for her - regardless of name; that includes the possibility that she's a Skywalker - is limitless regardless of background, Skywalker or not. But I also think the potential through line with Ben Solo serving as our Skywalker (which I don't think the case, but I've been mulling it over for a while now) is limitless too, and could perhaps fit the story even better.

We'll just have to wait and see. I wouldn't close the gates on any of these theories myself - other than the outlandish and obscure (looking at you Kenobi).

 

Having her being a Kenobi is the same problem with her being a Skywalker. And worse. Because in the TFA's world. Kenobi is a long gone dead man.

 

How is non-skywalker child make it original?

It sounds like if you read he script with her lastname redacted you wouldn't know if it was original or not

 

Well, if nothing else, we can agree the Kylo Ren is the best part of the ST. Here's to hoping EP8 really hits it out of the park.

 

That latter point being one of my many arguments against it: how is that explained by anyone?

But, actually, I think her being a Kenobi is much worse than being a Skywalker, as you rightly said; from everything I've seen of this theory so far, it requires a character's arc that we've known for 40 years almost (Jedi Knight, then Master, who abides by the Code and stands by the Jedi after they have fallen has a fallen apprentice, and protects fallen apprentice's son at all costs...) to be retconned at some point or another.

I think it's a very different problem. Skywalker is much more simple to explain narratively, and if this saga really is a Skywalker story, then of course it makes sense. Obviously, if it were the case she were a Skywalker, we'd have material provided to us to convince us of that. Completing the puzzle, if you like.

 

That's my major concern too ...

Are they really going to copy / paste the OT all along ?

How can a story group could be so much unoriginal ... It's impossible. And if I trust my feelings, I know that they didn't come that way.

 

No it's the same problem. Kenobi was a jedi, Luke is a jedi too. Jedis are tied to vows and to some rules. It's just worse because noone know who Kenobi is and it has no interest to have some line like :

Rey, your grandfather was Obi Wan Kenobi ...

Rey : Who the f*** is this ?

But to the core of the problem, Skywalker or Kenobi is the same issue, it's spitting on the whole lore as it is told in the movies.

 

I have no problem with the prequels.

 

Well, except that these are two very different time frames.

Let's see...without being a question of any real charge, do Christians, Muslims, and people of other religions nowadays still carry out major Crusades to spread their 'Word' as they did centuries ago? Can women vote now?

Different eras result in different perspectives based on past results. The view of Luke - and likely the galaxy - on the Jedi Code is likely very different to how it was in the PT era, especially when we learn that Force sensitives having children can result in arguably greater Force sensitive children.

 

??

Where is the point ? Is being a jedi a religion ? Absolutely not. And Star Wars is not the real world.

 

Of that I am, of course, aware. At least literally. Thematically, whimsically, carelessly...I think it's the real world on the grandest scale of all. It is a macrocosm of all that is wrong and all that is right, and every nanny and crook in between.

My point is that ideologies and goals change as time wears on, as do the way in which they are shared to allow for growth of a society. I'm sure that much of the galaxy ("hokey religions" comes to mind) would think of the Jedi as something of a religion.

 

But why now ? Luther had his reasons to change it. But why would Luke changed it to his own purpose ? It's ( in my opinion ) what defines a guru or a charlatan.

Jedis is an order like the Templars, the Martinist, Rusicrucians. ( not sure of the translation though ).

There is no cult in the jedi order.

And why only changing the attachment rule ? Because it pleases the crowd ? Where's the logic in there ? Why now, why him ? Who is Luke to change this ? Did he leave 900 years ? Does he have eternal wisdom ? He's still searching for knowledge, that means he still has a lot to learn before making so important decisions.

Of course, Luke can have a family then he leaves the order and have an ordinary life like thousand of millions people in the galaxy, noone will charge him.

 

. im trying to contain the anger I feel with these close minded Jedi fanboyism induce comments. If you can't see everyone else's points as having the potential to be valid then why are you arguing. Sorry guy this is a waste of my time when I could be geeking out about the future of SW, in a positive manner.

 

Tarkin refers to the Jedi as a religion in ANH so it was at least perceived by some outsiders as a religion. As to the Jedi code, while it is canon that the PT Jedi had a rule against attachment in their code, it is NOT canon that the code is absolute, indisputable, infallible and unchangeable or has been the same throughout the history of the Jedi. In fact, there is canon proof that the opposites is true. In the TPM, Qui-Gon tells Obi-Wan that there were parts of the code that was outdated and should be done away with. That tells us that the Jedi Council had the authority, at any time, to change the code or decide what the code would be for the Jedi Order they led. If Yoda and company could have changed the code as they saw fit in the PT era, than Luke certainly would have the same authority over his Jedi Order. The fact is we don't know the full history of the code or even the complete contents of the PT code so we can't be sure if the attachment rule was always in place or not. Logically we would have to assume that the code evolved over time and was adapted to fit circumstances or changed/amended after specific events brought about a belief that such a change was needed. In the end though, the code was written by mortal beings rather than the Force itself that created a son to clean up the mess that was the PT Jedi and destroy the Sith.

 

Tarkin obviously knew nothing about the Force. I do agree that we don't have a millenary knowledge of the jedi order but I'm discussing what is in the movies and the cartoons. I can't really do more.

But if we have to assume that the saga isn't worth some hints or proof I think we are all done discussing here.

Once again, this thread is about evidences at his start and it became everyone wishes and speculations of what is or isn't on screen and they way we see it.

Believe me or not but I try to be impartial. I just explain the jedi order as I feel it is narrated.

And by these statements, I really don't see why Luke Skywalker is wise enough to take the decisions to change it to his own benefit. It's not the wisdom as I see it.