You know, there's just no way I can parse that so that it makes any sense considering it's Kenobi saying it to a rapidly descending into darkness Anakin.

Is this a clever wink and a nod to the audience, that the Jedi Code for all its good intent is hypocritical and the Order deserves to fall? That even Obi-Wan can't see that?

Is it just bad writing? Something that sounded cool unless you examined it?

Or am I seriously just giving a throwaway line too much attention?

I'd love to hear what everyone thinks of the line, as long as it doesn't descend into simple prequel-bashing.

Take it and run

I love the way it clashes with its own point, it's like the krogan in Mass Effect 2 claiming "You humans are all racist"

Or for a real world example, when someone claims "Only old white people are bigots"

Obi Wan didn't even want to fight Anakin, even at the end he couldn't bring himself to kill him.

On that note, during the conversation, he was trying to convince 'himself' that Anakin was still a Jedi, Yoda was wrong, and he hadn't really become a Sith.

He was more talking to himself or thinking out loud when he said it. He should have said "A Jedi doesn't deal in absolutes, but a Sith does."

Just more bad writing from the God of bad dialogue.

You're all expecting way too much out of George Lucas.

It's a flippant one-liner, and while it's mediocre in context, it's awesome to drop on people at work.

I've probably sent out a dozen e-mails over my career that simply state "Only the Sith deal in absolutes, [Person Who Made Statement]." Guaranteed to end any dissidence.

German Wikipedia said something like:

In the time before the Iraq War Bush said in one of his speaches: "If you are not with us, you are with the terrorists."

So Lucas took this line and put it into Anakin's mouth ("If you are not with me, you are my enemy!"). Then he put what he thinks about it into Obi-Wan's mouth.

Really, the statement seems so missplaced that this explanation makes almost sense.

"Do or do not, there is no try."

No, because that one works. You perform an action. You either succeed, or you do not. Granted, there are degrees of success and failure, but at the end of the day, the statement works.

You sit down to eat a whole apple (less the core, we'll say).

Option one. You eat the entire apple. Success.

Option two. You eat none or only part of the apple. Failure, since your goal was to eat the apple.

It's hokey, but accurate.

Take it and run,

Or am I seriously just giving a throwaway line too much attention?

 

Yes you are

It made a lot of sense to me, and still does.

Here's the whole bit of dialogue:

***

Anakin: "I have bought peace, freedom, and justice to my new empire!"

Obi-Wan: "'Your new Empire'?"

A: "Don't make me kill you."

O: "Anakin, my allegiance is to the Senate, to democracy!"

A: "If you're not with me, then you're my enemy."

O: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes. I will do what I must."

***

Now, it's not speaking in absolutes, but dealing in absolutes that's the problem. As in, applying an absolute view of the galaxy to your daily doings, without any form of compromise.

What he's trying to tell Anakin is that Jedi deal in compromises, and that if Anakin would just allow him a way to end their confrontation without having to fight, he'd gladly take it.

But because Anakin is acting like a Sith and seeing the world in absolute terms - my way, or the highway - then he's not giving Obi-Wan any other choice.

I remember when the movie came out some of the critics said that they thought it was Lucas calling George W. Bush an evil sith. Cause that's when he was saying that "you're either with us or against us" line in his speeches all the time which was a threat against countries that harbor terrorists.

So it was probably political.

I remember when the movie came out some of the critics said that they thought it was Lucas calling George W. Bush an evil sith. Cause that's when he was saying that "you're either with us or against us" line in his speeches all the time which was a threat against countries that harbor terrorists.

 

So it was probably political.

it is an evil act itself.

some people don't want side with either usa or the terrorest whats their fault with this?

I dont know, the way I took the line is sith only know how to feed off emotion (absolutes as in "I'm mad" ..I'm lustful"...ect) while Jedi meditate and what not. This to me is true, and the line does make sense to me.

To better describe it...with sith everything is labeled, with Jedi it is supposed to be in theory anyway, far more complex.

Which is ironic to me because Palp planned everything and got what he wanted through cold calculations through dozens of years.

"Only a Sith deals in Absolutes" is an absolute. Saying an Absolute is an action that involves dealing with an absolute, and therefore a logical fallacy unless Obiwan is admitting he's a Sith.

However, dealing with absolutes does not equal dealing in absolutes.

However, dealing with absolutes does not equal dealing in absolutes.

I think what he/she is saying is Only means one or the other, which is an absolute.

The point of "Do, or do not, there is no try" is that when you decide to do something, you should commit to seeing it through. "I'll try," is most often an excuse, a show of effort, a shrug, followed by "Well, I tried." It is failure before the attempt is even made. Instead deciding to "try," decide to "do." Then, if you fail, you did put all your effort into the endeavor, instead of just the minimal amount required to say you "tried."

As for "only a Sith deals in absolutes," it is part of a much larger context of similarly self-defeating statements. "There's an exception to every rule," "there are no absolutes," etc. Well, if there's an exception to every rule, isn't there an exception to the rule that there's an exception to every rule, creating a rule that has no exceptions? If there are no absolutes, then it is not absolute that there are no absolutes, thus there IS an absolute?

Thus, if there is an exception to every rule, and only a Sith deals in absolutes, the exception to the rule that "only a Sith deals in absolutes" is Obi-Wan saying that "only a Sith deals in absolutes."

that complet bull crap we do not deal in absoluetes !!!

btw i am sith

it's like a mantra or proverb and not meant to be taken literally

it's like Yoda saying "No! Try not. Do, or do not. There is no try."

You cannot do without trying first

If you want to get down to it, I think there is a lot that is hypocritical in Star Wars. Like the attachment to people. Yet they serve the Republic, which means they have some type of attachment to it. How many people ended up going to the dark side by defending the Republic? I can think of a few, Revan and Malak, Anakin and probably more. Well, Anakin fell because of his attachment to Padame more so than saving the Republic, but you get the drift here.

To answer the OP's question, yes, if the writer was clever it wasn't a throw away line at all. Because they deal in absolutes is one of the reasons why the Sith hate the Jedi, and it's a never ending balancing act between two factions.

The point of "Do, or do not, there is no try" is that when you decide to do something, you should commit to seeing it through. "I'll try," is most often an excuse, a show of effort, a shrug, followed by "Well, I tried." It is failure before the attempt is even made. Instead deciding to "try," decide to "do." Then, if you fail, you did put all your effort into the endeavor, instead of just the minimal amount required to say you "tried."

 

As for "only a Sith deals in absolutes," it is part of a much larger context of similarly self-defeating statements. "There's an exception to every rule," "there are no absolutes," etc. Well, if there's an exception to every rule, isn't there an exception to the rule that there's an exception to every rule, creating a rule that has no exceptions? If there are no absolutes, then it is not absolute that there are no absolutes, thus there IS an absolute?

 

Thus, if there is an exception to every rule, and only a Sith deals in absolutes, the exception to the rule that "only a Sith deals in absolutes" is Obi-Wan saying that "only a Sith deals in absolutes."

/head asplodes

You know, there's just no way I can parse that so that it makes any sense considering it's Kenobi saying it to a rapidly descending into darkness Anakin.

The Star Wars films make a lot more sense once you accept that practically everything Kenobi says is intentionally misleading and manipulative.

However, dealing with absolutes does not equal dealing in absolutes.

but saying an absolute is dealing in one.

/head asplodes

Yeap, my work here is done.

/dusts hands