SPECULATION Why Luke Skywalker has to have had a child.

I believed for a long time that Finn might be Luke's biological son, I even got into arguments regarding if it was possible for someone like Hamill to have a child with Boyega's skin color (which it is), but then a friend pointed out a simple fact that for some reason I hadn't considered , Boyega's facial features don't bear any resemblance at all. If they wanted Finn to be his son they would have chosen someone with at least some similarities.

 

Just about anything CAN happen. Nothing HAS to happen.

 

I thought of a way to have Luke have no biological kids but still continue with the Skywalker name. First though let me say that I've zero problem with Luke having actual kids, as far as I'm concerned anything goes as long as the story makes sense. But having said, I personally would go with a "no actual kids" route with Luke, and I'll explain why; but in the end I have Finn and Rey (possibley even Kylo) end up all with the Skywalker last name, and they take the name because they see Luke as their father in the sense that he is their Jedi Master; it's an abstract father/child relationship that will be viewed as even stronger and 'more real' than a material father/child relationship. Perhaps we will never learn Finn or Rey's true last names and we will only ever know them by the last name Skywalker when they take that name. I would have it so that all of Luke's padawans would become Skywalkers; and thus continue the name, and in a broader, more symbolic way which itself is conducive to movie-making. So that's how we keep the Skywalker name without Luke having actual kids.

But here's why I would go "no actual kids" route: Luke should seem to be beyond the things of the material world at this point. The Jedi never had a problem with having no material offspring, Ben and Yoda were in exile and their character to not have kids which they didn't obviously. But it's the whole point of mysticism is to rise above the material things and work completely in abstractions; the material world and all its workings are discarded in pursuit of abstract worlds and workings. Luke shouldn't really even be interested in doing the nasty. That's like the foundation of material thought and desire, something Luke should be beyond by this point in his Jedi ascent.

Also if you were to ask me "Do you want to see Luke in a physical relationship with someone?" I'd say "I'd prefer not to" (though again, it doesn't ultimately matter to me); we can leave the relationships to e.g. Han and Leia. We could even leave physical relationships out of it all together and I'd be fine with that.

So after this I'll theorize that Luke has no actual children, but will pass the name Skywalker to at least Rey and Finn (who will only ever have the last name Skywalker- they don't even have last names when the movie starts) when they become padawans. Kylo Ren is then probably Han and Leia's kid. I'll speculate he becomes a Skywalker at the end of the trilogy, so there's three of them at the end.

--- Double Post Merged, Nov 28, 2015, Original Post Date: Nov 28, 2015 ---

Oh wait: the eyes! Let me speculate even further that our "lineage" will come from some kind of "Force relationship" a father/child Force-relationship that is detected through THE EYES! "I know your eyes, I've seen your eyes" all this speculation about the Force and the eyes. Maz will tell Rey and Finn they have the "eyes of Skywalker" in some Forcey way.

 

To me it's important that they (writers) go on with the Skywalker saga (THEY ARE Star Wars).
But maybe I prefer Han&Leia offspring.
Being Luke the dad would mean they have to explail with who, when, how.....

 

No it doesn't, how much did you know about Padme before the PT?
A few simple lines can give all the background we need.

 

Thank god, somebody else gets it. They can (and probably will) explain the entire backstory between ROTJ and TFA in small segments during the entire trilogy, 5 -10 minutes in each film, until we finally get the full picture.

 

Yes Luke's baby's mama need not real explanation but JJ was pretty clear that the back story was the OT that to me is big signal that you should expect the story to follow the simplest path to the ST. That meant Han and Leia have kids. For Luke to have kids she does not require a back story. I mean we did not need Padme's story before the PT she was a big part of the PT it was her story.

I only pray that if they do have Luke have fallen in love and have kids that they go back and tell the story in an Anthology its too big a story to not tell.

 

That's not the same though. In ANH I just met everyone and didn't care about familial relationships. It wasn't until the very end of ESB that "family" became a thing. So you had RotJ to throw in a few family details. But I now know Luke Skywalker. This isn't someone I just met like Rey or Finn (or Luke in ANH), this is Luke. Luke having a kid is like meeting an old friend who used to be somewhat of a loner- no relationships who says "Oh I have a kid now". Details are expected. That's a big thing to have a kid, and who the woman was.

And Padme did get her backstory role in her crucial part of the story yet this mystery woman who had my pal Luke's kid I never even meet?

--- Double Post Merged, Nov 28, 2015, Original Post Date: Nov 28, 2015 ---

In other words, I don't care about "who is Rey's mother" (unless they provide me a reason to care)? but I do care about "who was Luke's 'wife'"? See the difference?

 

Luke doesn't have to have a child, he doesn't need that distraction.

 

This would be the best choice and balanced too.

 

this is just an awful comparison.

 

No it's not, it's actually quite appropriate, she is the mother to Luke and Leia and wife of Anakin, why is knowing her background less important than Luke's wife?

 

i believe TARS has explained quite well why i view this is a shoddy comparison.

 

I won't be disappointed if Luke has children BUT I sincerely prefer Han and Leia since I know them for years and it's a good (and logical) development of their relationship.

 

Over-share on a speculation thread? No matter, I browse SW internet sites at my own risk!

I'm a little surprised I haven't come across a photo analysis of the actors eye's yet - just in case there's a non-Force similarity!

I agree but am quite happy to leave some things like this completely unexplored by film, book or comic. We could even leave some prime stories for future generations of fans. I'm still unsure how I'm going to take the re-casting of human OT characters like a young Han.

 

Maybe not physically raised by Luke, but raised by Luke in the ways of the Force. Not a father in the ways of the crude matter world, but a father in the ways of the luminous Force. Each type father is as equally fatherly and I would argue that the "teacher-father" in fact has a stronger and more "real" connection to the "student-child" than the "crude matter father".

But I do recall some vitriol concerning midichlorians and needing the right bloodline to be able to use the Force. Many people seemed to be upset at the idea that not just anyone could use the Force, but only a certain group of people related by blood. I believe JJ might be going to introduce something new, something about the Force and the eyes. JJ may be moving the family lineage into a more mystical abstraction by creating a new form of Force relationship that allows anyone to "awaken" and use the Force. Instead of selectivism by bloodline, we inclusivity by "Forceline". Instead of crude matter Skywalker family connections we "rise above the material/crude matter" and establish a "luminous/mystical/spiritual" Skywalker family which has its family bond in the Force which is somehow connected with the eyes.

Just the name Skywalker itself, think about it. Not Luke Groundwalker, but Skywalker: he's walking above the material things, he's walking in the abstract things, and his "father" connection with anyone is going to be as an "abstract father" which is in fact the stronger familial ties; the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak, as the proverb goes.

I'm not following the similarity.

Bear in mind again that I'm not 100%, and that my posts here are simply the result of your original, excellent point which I've had to contend with in some way to see if it was "lights out" for the "no kids Luke" theory. I don't think it is, and I believe an "all inclusive come who may" Force is consistent with the casting for the main young characters. I'd like to think you don't have to be white to be a "son of Skywalker" as it were. If we open the family up to a higher level of connection, we allow everyone everywhere to come in. That just seems a good message and a deft way to handle the continuance of the Skywalker name, while allowing all the people everywhere to feel a connection.

 

He would probably look more Brazillian than like how Boyega looks like .

 

The thing is, Luke's wife doesn't have to be an incredible person. She doesn't have to be a Jedi, or a rebel, or anything of the sort (which would be a breath of fresh air, since most Star Wars characters seem to be superheroes). She just needs to be someone we can believe Luke fell in love with, and married. Maybe when she died, he believes his daughter died with her, and the people who rescued Rey, left her on Jakku, probably because they were being pursued, and figured they could come back later for Rey, only they probably got killed before they could.

I don't expect them to reveal much info, if anything, about this potential character in this film, because I believe the only appropriate way for that part of the story to be told, is via Luke directly to Rey, which means it will either be at the end of TFA, or somewhere in the next film, perhaps in the middle.