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

Ok let look at it.

We know that Leia and Han sent Ben to Luke because he had too much Vader in him:
LEIA
You think I want to forget him? I
want him back!
Han looks at her with sympathy.

HAN
There was nothing we could've done.
(hard for him to say)
There was too much Vader in him.

LEIA
That's why I wanted him to train
with Luke. I just never should have
sent him away. That's when I lost
him. That's when I lost you both.

We also know that Ben thinks Han was a bad father, he tells Rey he was a disapointment. We know from TPM novel that the PT era Jedi didn't take children over 1 year of age.

Is it resonable to assume that Ben 1) Was signing of being like Darth Vader and 2) Had formed memories and an opinion of his father before he was 1?

 

There's a difference between shaping a person and saying parents/teachers are responsible for things that I do.

I'm not sure I've seen anyone in this thread jump to conclusions and then cite them as authoritatively as you do. It's pretty remarkable. I'm impressed. To be fair though, citing the fact Obi-Wan trained an older Luke as proof the Jedi code rules on attachments have been modified a super stretch. Suggesting otherwise is just being stubborn.

 

I agree no one should excuse Anakin's actions. They are is own.

But its also silly to say the people who were basically his parents and mentors played no part in shaping who he was either.

 

You are right. Anyone can be redeemed.
I'm not saying that Anakin did nothing wrong, but nobody is born evil. Bad influences make you evil.
That's where the Jedi and the Jedi code failed.

 

I didn't say they were responsibile for it, in fact I said the opposite. But you also can't say they are 100% blameless.

Thats not what I said.

Yoda told Luke not to go to Cloud City. Yoda and Obi-wan told Luke he had to kill Vader. If he was told about the Jedi code and rules, we can see through Ben how he didn't follow them.

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 12, 2017, Original Post Date: Jan 12, 2017 ---

So going to save them was the wrong thing to do?

 

I have contributed to this myself, but let's get this thread back on topic. This thread has become a catch all for pretty much everything.

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

 

Im still confused as to how someone cannot think clearly or act rationally if they have attachments to other people Is the Star Wars universe different from our own in that people who form attachments to other people become irrational, emotional messes?

 

Fact is there is little to no evidence, either way, in the film itself. The two biggest pieces of evidence we have is Kennedy's quote about the Saga movies being about the Skywalker family and Daisy's comments about the answer being obvious.

So fact is 1) We need Skywalker characters to push the story forward since these saga movies are about them (and I know Ben is part of the family, but he is a Solo. Its not as strong/good from a narrative stand point) and 2) What is the most obvious answer after watching TFA? They went to some lengths with Rey's costume design, speeder design, environment she lives in, not knowing her parents, meeting a little beping droid, having destiny thrust on her, natural ability with the force, instantly a good pilot, Anakin's and Luke's lightsaber (or Kyber Crystal) called to her etc... to have Rey invoke Luke.

While I maintain that good stories can be told either way, it can make sense either way and as fans we should be open minded about the movies enough to accept a good story regardless of the answer - the evidence at this point (and it is far from "beyond a doubt") is that she is a Skywalker.

 

Kennedy quote: drink

What's obvious to Daisy who is close to production may not be obvious to the audience. So that's not really evidence one way or the other.

 

Just becuse you don't like when Kennedy said doesn't take away from it validity. The producer and gatekeeper of all things Star Wars has said that the Saga movies (NOT the ST, the SAGA MOVIES -we have ZERO reason to believe Episodes X, XI, XII, XIII, XIV, XV........ won't be considered saga movies) are about the Skywalkers. That is the most basic, solid, confirmed piece of information we have. If you refuse to use that as your starting point then you're just engaging in wide speculation while ignoring facts and evidence.

But Daisy thought itw as obvious in the movie. So while its possible some super subtle thing is blantly obvious to Daisy, its also possible (I would argue more likely, occam's razor and all) that the obvious answer is the right one.

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 12, 2017, Original Post Date: Jan 12, 2017 ---

The PT era Jedi saw the mother/son relationship as attachment, we get our lecture from Yoda about this because of a mother/son relationship. Luke has allowed students with this attachment to train. Sorry, your argument that Luke is 100% anti-attachment is wrong. It may not go all the way to marriage, but being anti-attachment. PERIOD. is wrong.

And he ignored Yoda's advice not to go save Han and Leia. Two things. And the anti-attachment rules. Three things. Oh - and you're saying when luke thinks he knows better he'll ignore what others tell him and do what he believes is right. So is it unthinkable that given Lukes life experience he'll see value in family attachment? So why is this the one thing he MUST follow?

Prove it. Prove to me that 5-10-15 of the Lost Jedi didn't turn to the Dark Side. And did it become the lost 19 after it was clear Dooku was a Sith?

Really? Love for someone can never make someone act selfishly? You could make a strong argument that Obi-wans love for Anakin kept him from killing him, what should a Jedi have done in that situation?

 

Those things apply to many, many real world jobs. There are a lot of people with a lot of power, and if they act irrationally it rarely has to do with their attachments to other people. They either have deeper issues, or are just think they deserve the power to do whatever they want. The thing is emotions come and go. It's how you handle them. It's more than possible to have emotions, but keep them in perspective to do what you need to do. Pretending they don't exist is dangerous.

 

You're allowed to believe what you want. It's not really worth time to discuss further. Even when I was on the Rey Skywalker bandwagon I thought the quote was meaningless. So there's nothing you're going to say to change my mind (or the mind of many others). You think it's evidence. I think it's comical it's still being brought up. Agree to disagree.

She knows the answer, so of course she thinks it's obvious. If there was an obvious answer from just watching the movie this wouldn't be the most debated topic from TFA. So her quote doesn't really tell us anything.

 

But the Jedi forbid these kinds of attachments and only took 1 year old studnets on to avoid them. Luke knowingly/willingly brought on students with these attachments. So he clearly doesn't view the same. He either teachers how you can deal with them or sees a risk/reward releationship with them. Either way, if he is willing to allow 1 kind, it is not a given he isn't willing to allow another.

The point isn't that Luke was right, its that Luke is willing to do what he thinks is right even if an authority figure tells him otherwise.

Attachment can be bad - but we have evidence of Luke dealing with it himself and allowing students who are attached. Facts - deal with them.

Thank you for posting the scene, but I don't see where in that scene it says none of the Lost 20 fell to the Darkside.

My point stills tands - Obi-wan loved Anakin and didn't do what he should have, what he was ordered to do..........which is why your issue with attachment is. OR are you going to argue Obi-wan was attached to Anakin?

President of the United States. And I don't think there has ever been a President without a family.

 

Did nothing interesting for 20 years?

 

Not when it comes to fact and non-fact. FACT is Kennedy said it. FACT is Kennedy is in a position to know. What GOOD REASON do you have to doubt her words or to assume they are only meant to include Episodes VII, VIII and IX?

Daisy's comment is more open to interruptation. Its possible that it is very subtle and Daisy doesn't get how its not obvious. But I also think she'd be intelligent and aware enough to know whats obvious to an audience and what isn't. You can't listen tow hat she has to say and ignore it or assume that means its not obvious. Maybe you're just overthinking it, and the obvious answer is the answer.

 

[/QUOTE]

So he trains his students to deal with attachments - therefore its ok to have them (I could see Luke seeing benefit in them). So getting married isn't a problem.

And the next time he sees Yoda he ignored what he tells him about his father. Ya, Luke really learned his lesson..........

I'm not talking about Budhism, I'm talking about STar Wars. YOU'VE said luke learned to deal with tem. YOU"VE the question is how he'd teach people to deal with them. We have EVIDENCE of Luke training students with attachment. We can safely say the ST era Jedi are different and how they view attachment is different. This may not extend to marriage - we can't know that - but your claim that it can't be because of attachment doesn't hold water and not amount of screaming buddhism will change that.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. They were still Jedi, they still left the order, and they kept the statues as a reminder of what happen. It seems your upset that you can't prove your theory, but its not need to start insulting people. Now if you have actually EVIDENCE that Dooku is the only member of the Lost 20 to turn the Darkside.....cool. But do you have that?

He was ordered to kill Anakin. Did he kill Anakin?

I said the President of the United states sits the job description you gave us (except the super powers) and they've never elected a single president (that I know of).