Skip to main content

star wars - Is the Dark Side of the Force more powerful?


I was watching the battle between Obi-Wan and Anakin in Revenge of the Sith, and it struck me that most of the time Obi-Wan was getting pushed back by Anakin, and he only really got the upper hand after getting the higher ground.


I later found that:



  1. Darth Vitiate drained the life of his home planet


  2. Darth Sion became immortal despite multiple mortal injuries and a broken body through his hatred

  3. Darth Sidious could produce a hyperspace wormhole that could destroy entire planets

  4. Darth Plagueis could apparently create new life from the force


Considering these feats it seems clear that the Dark Side is vastly superior in terms of power. However, Yoda doesn't seem to think so when he tells Luke in the Empire Strikes Back:



Luke: Vader... Is the dark side stronger?


Yoda: No, no, no. Quicker, easier, more seductive.




Answer




As with many questions about the Force, the answer depends on a certain point of view.


Yoda says that the dark side is not stronger. However, you note several feats performed by Sith that are far more powerful than anything we've seen Jedi do with the light side of the force. In addition, there the lightsaber duels. Darth Maul is beaten by Obi-wan, but he kills Qui-gon in the process. And, as DVK observes, when Anakin defeated Dooku, Mace Windu bested Palpatine, and when Luke beat Vader, they all did so by using the anger and aggression of the dark side. This leaves Obi-wan's victory over Anakin and possibly Count Dooku fleeing from Yoda as the only "pure" light side wins, and in both cases the Jedi combatant is much more experienced than his opponent. So, it appears that the dark side is stronger, despite what Yoda says.


However, Yoda is unlikely to think of strength solely in terms of winning fights or destroying enemies. He is probably referring to the ability to influence events, in addition to what could be called "strength of character". Looking at events from this point of view, they seem to support his statement.


Mace Windu's Vaapad fighting style was based on controlling his aggression, and was explicitly a light-side technique.


When Anakin fought Dooku, Dooku went easy on him in an attempt to get him to use his anger, so that he might be turned to the dark side. It worked. I doubt that Yoda would consider Anakin becoming a Sith Lord a "win".


Palpatine and Vader tried the same thing against Luke. He beat Vader in a lightsaber fight because he was supposed to. Darth Vader spent most of his time taunting Luke, urging him to give in to his anger. Even when they were fighting, Vader didn't attack much. Luke's real victory was not attacking in anger and cutting off Vader's hand; it was refusing to give in and kill him. This was a "light-side" act. It let not only to the defeat of the Emperor, but also to Anakin's redemption -- something that the dark side never could have achieved.


Similarly, when Obi-wan fought Darth Vader for the last time, he was not trying to "win" in the traditional sense. He was buying time for the others. He also didn't resist when Vader struck the killing blow. So, in a sense, he lost, but as a result, he was able to continue to mentor Luke, and even provide an example for Luke's eventual decision not to fight.


So, what Yoda told you was true, from a certain point of view.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize Missy right away?

So after it was established that Missy is actually both the Master, and the "woman in the shop" who gave Clara the TARDIS number... ...why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize her right away? I remember the Tenth Doctor in The Sound of Drums stating that Timelords had a way of recognizing other Timelords no matter if they had regenerated. And Clara should have recognized her as well... I'm hoping for a better explanation than "Moffat screwed up", and that I actually missed something after two watchthroughs of the episode. Answer There seems to be a lot of in-canon uncertainty as to the extent to which Time Lords can recognise one another which far pre-dates Moffat's tenure. From the Time Lords page on Wikipedia : Whether or not Time Lords can recognise each other across regenerations is not made entirely clear: In The War Games, the War Chief recognises the Second Doctor despite his regeneration and it is implied that the Doctor knows him when they fir

the lord of the rings - Why is Gimli allowed to travel to Valinor?

Gimli was allowed to go to Valinor despite not being a ring bearer. Is this explained in detail or just with the one line "for his love for Galadriel"? Answer There's not much detail about this aside from what's said in Appendix A to Return of the King: We have heard tell that Legolas took Gimli Glóin's son with him because of their great friendship, greater than any that has been between Elf and Dwarf. If this is true, then it is strange indeed: that a Dwarf should be willing to leave Middle-earth for any love, or that the Eldar should receive him, or that the Lords of the West should permit it. But it is said that Gimli went also out of desire to see again the beauty of Galadriel; and it may be that she, being mighty among the Eldar, obtained this grace for him. More cannot be said of this matter. And Appendix B: Then Legolas built a grey ship in Ithilien, and sailed down Anduin and so over Sea; and with him, it is said, went Gimli the Dwarf . And when that sh

Did the gatekeeper and the keymaster get intimate in Ghostbusters?

According to TVTropes ( usual warning, don't follow the link or you'll waste half your life in a twisty maze of content ): In Ghostbusters, it's strongly implied that Dana Barret, while possessed by Zuul the Gatekeeper, had sex with Louis Tully, who was possessed by Vinz Clortho the Keymaster (key, gate, get it?), in order to free Big Bad Gozer. In fact, a deleted scene from the movie has Venkman explicitly asking Dana if she and Louis "did it". I turned the quote into a spoiler since it contains really poor-taste joke, but the gist of it is that it's implied that as part of freeing Gozer , the two characters possessed by the Keymaster and the Gatekeeper had sex. Is there any canon confirmation or denial of this theory (canon meaning something from creators' interviews, DVD commentary, script, delete scenes etc...)? Answer The Richard Mueller novelisation and both versions of the script strongly suggest that they didn't have sex (or at the very l

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed.