• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers 'Obi-Wan Kenobi' series [Spoiler Discussion]

Well that is his title (retroactively; yes I know), so it's not really something that needs a justification.
I mean in regards to Obi-Wan using Darth as though it's a first name in ANH, and that "Young" Obi-Wan has never called him it before, so they slotted it in there just before they go their separate ways.
 
I mean in regards to Obi-Wan using Darth as though it's a first name in ANH, and that "Young" Obi-Wan has never called him it before, so they slotted it in there just before they go their separate ways.
When exactly would he had done so? Anakin was dubbed Vader maybe a day or two before Obi-Wan barbecued him in a lava pit, and he only learned of it just before leaving to do so. Not a lot of opportunities, let alone reason to address him by his formal Sith title, especially since as previously noted; Obi-Wan had yet to fully accept and process what Anakin had become. When he did, that's when he used the title, as we saw.

So yeah, this is not a thing that ever needed to be "justified".
Obi-wan is still a Jedi. Killing Vader right then would not have been in knowledge or defense. It would be an attack on essentially a crippled man who use to be his friend.
I don't know where people get this idea that Jedi are adverse to ending people. Literally the first time we saw a lightsaber drawn in combat was Obi-Wan using lethal force to break up a bar fight of all things (at least that was the intent of the scene as written, whatever other storytellers may have retconned about their fates.)

Point being: Jedi aren't Batman. They have no compunctions about maiming or killing opponents if necessary. Indeed, literally disarming people is their signature move when threatened. They just do it dispassionately, and discriminately. Drawing a blaster on a Jedi is historically a very good way to loose a hand after all.

I also contest the claim that Vader was "crippled". This is a man that can crush your body into mulch with his brain. I don't care how many limbs you hack off the bugger he's still lethally dangerous.
Also; that's not the definition of an attack. That's ending a fight that the other started, which is exactly what Jedi are trained to do.
 
Last edited:
But why didn't Obi Wan kill Vader if he was only a Sith at that point?
Despite the teachings against attachment that are part of the Jedi Order's core philosophy, the relationship between master and apprentice is still a close one. In some ways it's like a parent and child, in others it could be similar to siblings, and indeed Obi-Wan does refer to Anakin as his brother in ROTS. So what it comes down to is, even recognizing he has become pure evil, Obi-Wan simply couldn't bring himself to kill someone he used to think of as a brother or perhaps even a son. Indeed, one could argue Obi-Wan has always known he'd never be able to kill Anakin no matter how necessary it might be, in ROTS he even begs Yoda to send him to fight Palpatine for this exact reason.

It's a lot like parents who know their child is a criminal, yet actively try to cover for them rather than turn them into the police.
 
When exactly would he had done so? Anakin was dubbed Vader maybe a day or two before Obi-Wan barbecued him in a lava pit, and he only learned of it just before leaving to do so. Not a lot of opportunities, let alone reason to address him by his formal Sith title, especially since as previously noted; Obi-Wan had yet to fully accept and process what Anakin had become. When he did, that's when he used the title, as we saw.

So yeah, this is not a thing that ever needed to be "justified".
I do believe we may be talking about different aspects of the same thing. Or my use of the word 'justified' is being taken the wrong way, or I should have chosen a different word.
 
Reverend said:
Point being: Jedi aren't Batman. They have no compunctions about maiming or killing opponents if necessary.
malreynolds-firefly.gif
 
In the recent fan edit of Kenobi that cuts it down to movie length, the guy who did it did put that voiceover of Qui Gon saying “he is the chosen one, he will bring balance to the Force” when Obi-Wan is staring at the injured Vader. Implying that’s why he let him live.

I don’t necessarily agree or disagree, but just saying as a point of interest
 
Last edited:
I get the sense that a lot of people fundamentally misunderstand/get too hung up on what attachment actually means to a Jedi.
It's not that they're not allowed to care about, or even love other people; it's that they're forbidden from allowing those feeling to control their actions. That's the "attachment" part. The part that treats a person like a possession and is unwilling or unable to let them go when the time comes.

In the case of Anakin & Obi-Wan . . . it's tricky, and very very messy. My take on Obi-Wan "sparing" Anakin the first time is simply that he didn't have it in him to finish him off, so he just walked away sure he was as good as dead.
The second time; as I explained above I'm leaning in the direction of is being both a tactical withdrawal, and from a storytelling POV Obi-Wan demonstrating that he was no longer controlled by his fears, or his guilt. He accepted that Anakin is gone and that it's not his role to rectify his mistake since it was never his to begin with. Anakin made his own choices.
In some ways it's like a parent and child, in others it could be similar to siblings, and indeed Obi-Wan does refer to Anakin as his brother in ROTS.
Lucas has described the Obi-Wan/Anakin dynamic as that of an older brother forced to raise a younger (step?) sibling against their better judgment (initially), and even then mostly out of a sense of obligation to the deceased "father" than anything to do with said sibling (again; initially). So yeah, the simulations father/brother dynamic is intentional and part of the constant source of tension between them in AorC.

I do believe we may be talking about different aspects of the same thing. Or my use of the word 'justified' is being taken the wrong way, or I should have chosen a different word.
I mean at most it's a nod to the line in ANH. No reason to read any more into it than that.

In the recent fan edit of Kenobi that cuts it down to movie length, the guy who did it did put that voiceover of Qui Gon saying “he is the chosen one, he will bring balance to the Force” when Obi-Wan is staring at the injured Vader. Implying that’s why he let him live.

I don’t necessarily agree or disagree, but just saying as a point of interest
. . . why would fan fiction be of any relevance whatsoever?
 
Last edited:
.. . why would fan fiction be of any relevance whatsoever?
:rolleyes: KNEW you’d give that kinda reaction. Literally why I wrote “just saying out of interest” in that I know it’s not canon or anything, but just saying as a random thought. Grow up and realise you’ll get on better in life without that snooty ass attitude
 
why would fan fiction be of any relevance whatsoever?
Because it's an easy example of why Obi-Wan potentially walked away.

I mean at most it's a nod to the line in ANH. No reason to read any more into it than that.
You acknowledging the possibility of it having been said intentionally in regards to ANH means we're already on the same page. Matters of degree means nothing to me in this instance. ;)
 
:rolleyes: KNEW you’d give that kinda reaction. Literally why I wrote “just saying out of interest” in that I know it’s not canon or anything, but just saying as a random thought. Grow up and realise you’ll get on better in life without that snooty ass attitude
Dial it back there sunshine. I'm just saying if you have your own take on something, then by all means share and explain it. But if all you got is "someone else made up something that I thought was cool", then that's up there with posting a link to some video rant in terms of conversational engagement.
You acknowledging the possibility of it having been said intentionally in regards to ANH means we're already on the same page. Matters of degree means nothing to me in this instance. ;)
If you get anywhere near a point with this, do let me know.
 
Dial it back there sunshine. I'm just saying if you have your own take on something, then by all means share and explain it. But if all you got is "someone else made up something that I thought was cool", then that's up there with posting a link to some video rant in terms of conversational engagement.
Oh calm down.
 
“That’s no Moon… it’s Reverend’s attitude!”

Please put me on Ignore as I’ve already given you the same courtesy. After 20+ years on this board I just can’t deal with (have time for) actual adults with that kinda nasty attitude anymore.
 
When exactly would he had done so? Anakin was dubbed Vader maybe a day or two before Obi-Wan barbecued him in a lava pit, and he only learned of it just before leaving to do so. Not a lot of opportunities, let alone reason to address him by his formal Sith title, especially since as previously noted; Obi-Wan had yet to fully accept and process what Anakin had become. When he did, that's when he used the title, as we saw.

So yeah, this is not a thing that ever needed to be "justified".

I don't know where people get this idea that Jedi are adverse to ending people. Literally the first time we saw a lightsaber drawn in combat was Obi-Wan using lethal force to break up a bar fight of all things (at least that was the intent of the scene as written, whatever other storytellers may have retconned about their fates.)

Point being: Jedi aren't Batman. They have no compunctions about maiming or killing opponents if necessary. Indeed, literally disarming people is their signature move when threatened. They just do it dispassionately, and discriminately. Drawing a blaster on a Jedi is historically a very good way to loose a hand after all.

I also contest the claim that Vader was "crippled". This is a man that can crush your body into mulch with his brain. I don't care how many limbs you hack off the bugger he's still lethally dangerous.
Also; that's not the definition of an attack. That's ending a fight that the other started, which is exactly what Jedi are trained to do.


I thought Obi-Wan should have killed Anakin on that Mustafar lava bank. Not because Anakin was a Sith or evil, but because it would have been merciful. Like Katniss and Peeta killing Cato in an act of mercy, instead of leaving him to slowly die by those mutts or from his wounds in "The Hunger Games". Leaving Anakin to slowly burn to death on that lava bank struck me as a possibly cruel and petty act. And a little cowardly.
 
I thought Obi-Wan should have killed Anakin on that Mustafar lava bank. Not because Anakin was a Sith or evil, but because it would have been merciful. Like Katniss and Peeta killing Cato in an act of mercy, instead of leaving him to slowly die by those mutts or from his wounds in "The Hunger Games". Leaving Anakin to slowly burn to death on that lava bank struck me as a possibly cruel and petty act. And a little cowardly.
This was one part of ROTS that I absolutely hated and felt was a poor story choice. As much as the impassioned pleas and great acting by McGregor with the "You were my brother, Anakin!" that Obi-Wan left Anakin to burn and just walks away, taking his weapon and leaving him to suffer. If Obi-Wan is the consummate Jedi this cuts deeply against that. Lucas' original idea that Anakin had fallen in to a melting pit (alluded to with Maul) and Obi-Wan not knowing his fate works much better than walking away assuming he died.
 
Yeah, especially as Obi-wan had recently seen footage of Anakin slaughtering younglings. It seems that it would have satisfied the idea of justice tempered with mercy for Obi-wan to have just given him the coup de grace.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top