Ahhh, apologies for going on and on about something you haven't seen yet! What I said isn't really spoiler-y, it's all stuff that is established pretty early on, but, yeah...I get carried away about this topic, as you can tell, lol. ;p
And yes, I can't help but concur with you on that one -- I personally feel that the part of the Code that forbids all romantic attachments (and thereby familial attachments as well) is a later addition and/or interpretation of the Code. Because the Jedi are a religious Order, they obviously need to have a Code of some sort, but as Qui-Gon said, Codes should not existence solely to govern *behaviour*. They should instead merely act as a guide or roadmap to understanding the Force. In other words, what is truly important about any rule is the *spirit* of the law, rather than the 'letter' of the law.
The Jedi believe in non-attachment, or rather, in practicing *detachment* on both a spiritual and material level, but imo, eschewing these types of relationships is not actually necessary to achieve this. These things are not mutually exclusive. In some ways, never allowing the Jedi to experience these sorts of relationships merely attempts to remove any form of 'temptation' towards attachment from their paths. Whereas, it's more difficult, perhaps, to find a level of detachment in one's outlook and actions while one has actual 'attachments' in form of loved ones, but ultimately this would help Jedi achieve a truer and more lasting form of 'non-attachment' (if that makes sense), if they could likewise find balance in all aspects of their own lives. And while there are of course some risks inherent in allowing Jedi to have relationships (and families), imo, there are just as many risks in forbidding this....as we know all-too well.
This is just my interpretation, but I feel sometimes like we are meant to see the 'no romantic relationships' thing as a sort of 'forbidden fruit' scenario with the the Jedi, and an element that was not always inherent in their beliefs, and which was perhaps tacked on to the Code later. It seems like a fear-based rule, rather than something totally necessary. Sure, there is an element of practicality in preferring that warrior monks not have their own families to worry about so that they can focus their attentions and loyalties to the Order itself, but again, this does not automatically equate to 'no romantic attachments *at all*'. But by the time of the Prequels there also seems to be an attitude amongst the Jedi of 'oh no, but what if' -- worrying about the consequences, etc., as though it were an inevitable conclusion that *all* romantic attachment leads inherently to disaster.... which is itself a 'fear of loss' based way of looking at things.
I also cannot help but think of George Lucas' very first film, THX 1183, about a sci-fi dystopian world controlled by 'robotic police' where love/desire is outlawed. The two main characters come to an awakening and stop taking their medication that suppresses such feelings/desires. While of course this is not exactly the same situation as the Jedi Order on Coruscant, it is interesting that, in the Prequels, Lucas decided to make the romantic attachments something that is so strictly forbidden by the Jedi at this time.
All I'm getting at here, is that I feel that we are indeed meant to see this as a flaw of the Jedi Order, in the sense that perhaps this part of the Code had become overly rigid by this point, and thus the Jedi's inability to see beyond the 'black and white' in this matter is intended to be viewed as a failing on their part.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2017-02-18 11:15 am (UTC)And yes, I can't help but concur with you on that one -- I personally feel that the part of the Code that forbids all romantic attachments (and thereby familial attachments as well) is a later addition and/or interpretation of the Code. Because the Jedi are a religious Order, they obviously need to have a Code of some sort, but as Qui-Gon said, Codes should not existence solely to govern *behaviour*. They should instead merely act as a guide or roadmap to understanding the Force. In other words, what is truly important about any rule is the *spirit* of the law, rather than the 'letter' of the law.
The Jedi believe in non-attachment, or rather, in practicing *detachment* on both a spiritual and material level, but imo, eschewing these types of relationships is not actually necessary to achieve this. These things are not mutually exclusive. In some ways, never allowing the Jedi to experience these sorts of relationships merely attempts to remove any form of 'temptation' towards attachment from their paths. Whereas, it's more difficult, perhaps, to find a level of detachment in one's outlook and actions while one has actual 'attachments' in form of loved ones, but ultimately this would help Jedi achieve a truer and more lasting form of 'non-attachment' (if that makes sense), if they could likewise find balance in all aspects of their own lives. And while there are of course some risks inherent in allowing Jedi to have relationships (and families), imo, there are just as many risks in forbidding this....as we know all-too well.
This is just my interpretation, but I feel sometimes like we are meant to see the 'no romantic relationships' thing as a sort of 'forbidden fruit' scenario with the the Jedi, and an element that was not always inherent in their beliefs, and which was perhaps tacked on to the Code later. It seems like a fear-based rule, rather than something totally necessary. Sure, there is an element of practicality in preferring that warrior monks not have their own families to worry about so that they can focus their attentions and loyalties to the Order itself, but again, this does not automatically equate to 'no romantic attachments *at all*'. But by the time of the Prequels there also seems to be an attitude amongst the Jedi of 'oh no, but what if' -- worrying about the consequences, etc., as though it were an inevitable conclusion that *all* romantic attachment leads inherently to disaster.... which is itself a 'fear of loss' based way of looking at things.
I also cannot help but think of George Lucas' very first film, THX 1183, about a sci-fi dystopian world controlled by 'robotic police' where love/desire is outlawed. The two main characters come to an awakening and stop taking their medication that suppresses such feelings/desires. While of course this is not exactly the same situation as the Jedi Order on Coruscant, it is interesting that, in the Prequels, Lucas decided to make the romantic attachments something that is so strictly forbidden by the Jedi at this time.
All I'm getting at here, is that I feel that we are indeed meant to see this as a flaw of the Jedi Order, in the sense that perhaps this part of the Code had become overly rigid by this point, and thus the Jedi's inability to see beyond the 'black and white' in this matter is intended to be viewed as a failing on their part.