獲選者的抉擇：論《星際大戰》與自由意志

國

立

交

通

大

學

外國語文學系外國文學與語言學碩士班

碩

士

論

文

獲選者的抉擇：論《星際大戰》與自由意志

The Choices of the Chosen One: Of Star Wars and Free Will

研 究 生：呂哲維

指導教授：李家沂 博士

獲選者的抉擇：論《星際大戰》與自由意志

The Choices of the Chosen One: Of Star Wars and Free Will

研 究 生：呂哲維 Student：Zhe-Wei Lu

指導教授：李家沂 Advisor：Chia-Yi Lee

國 立 交 通 大 學

外國語文學系外國文學與語言學碩士班

碩 士 論 文

Submitted to Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures College of Humanity and Social Science

National Chiao Tung University in partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of Master

in

Foreign Literatures and Linguistics

July 2011

Hsinchu, Taiwan, Republic of China

獲選者的抉擇： 論《星際大戰》與自由意志 研究生：呂哲維 指導教授：李家沂 博士 國立交通大學外國語文學系暨外國文學與語言學碩士班 摘 要 《星際大戰》系列電影由諸多靈感而生，卻也帶出更多的啟發。在正義對抗 邪惡的面紗下，「自由意志」和「選擇」的議題不僅僅存在於那遙遠銀河系，也 存在於我們的生命當中。人類究竟有沒有自由意志來做出自己的選擇呢？這個如 肉中刺的問題已存在了好幾世紀。試圖對此問題做出迴響，本文將以《星際大戰》 中的「獲選者」安納金‧天行者的一生及其抉擇作為論述主軸，並以沙特在《存 在主義與人文主義》中對選擇和自由的觀點作為論述起點。縱然沙特主張人類擁 有絕對的自由來做出選擇，並因而毅然決然反對神與決定論，自由意志的問題仍 未被充分適切地解決。如自由意志辯論—人類歷史上最長最激烈的辯論之一—所 顯示的，自由意志直至現在仍是個問題，且極可能在近期的未來中也不會有結論 出現。因此，本文將介紹與討論在這活生生辯論中的四個主要觀點：相容論、不 相容論、自由論、及決定論。在難以否認決定論和自由意志很可能不存在的情況 下，我們或許會問：「那麼我為什麼要存在？」沙特聲稱即使神不存在，生命仍 是有意義的；但若自由意志不存在，生命是否還能具有意義呢？我們要如何在沒 有自由意志的生命中找到意義呢？或許安納金‧天行者的故事可以給予這些問題 一些啟發。 關鍵詞：星際大戰、安納金‧天行者、自由意志、選擇、沙特、相容論、不相容 論、自由論、決定論

The Choices of the Chosen One: Of Star Wars and Free Will

Postgraduate: Zhe-Wei Lu Advisor: Dr. Chia-Yi Lee

Graduate Institute of Foreign Literatures and Linguistics National Chiao Tung University

ABSTRACT

The Star Wars saga is a series created from various inspirations and creates more in return. Beneath the good-versus-evil veil, the problem of free will and choice is an issue in the galaxy far, far away, as well as in our daily life. Do human beings have free will to make choices? That’s a question like a splinter in the mind for centuries. Attempting to provide some thoughts to the question, this thesis takes the life and choices of Anakin Skywalker—the “Chosen One” in Star Wars—as the central line of discussion and starts from Jean-Paul Sartre’s ideas of choice and freedom in his

Existentialism and Humanism. While Sartre contends that human beings have

absolute freedom in his choices and thus refuted God and determinism resolutely, the problem of free will is not solved amply and aptly. As the free will debate—one of the longest and fieriest debates in the human history—shows, free will is still a problem and probably won’t come to an end in the near future. Accordingly, four major views in this living debate—Compatibilism, Incompatibilism, Libertarianism, and Hard Determinism—would be introduced and discussed in this thesis. Seeing that determinism is hard to refute and that free will probably doesn’t exist, we may want to ask, “Then why do I exist?” Sartre claims life is meaningful without God, but can life also be meaningful without free will? How can we find meanings in a life without free will? Mayhap the story of Anakin Skywalker can shed some light on these questions.

Key Words: Star Wars, Anakin Skywalker, Free Will, Choice, Sartre, Compatibilism, Incompatibilism, Libertarianism, Hard Determinism

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Writing this thesis is a long but enjoyable journey, yet without those helping hands along the way, the project would not have been possible.

I am especially indebted to Dr. Chia-Yi Lee, whose perspicacious remarks and constant encouragement not only helped shape my writing into a better form but also inspired my new interests in the free will issue. I am also deeply grateful to Dr. Ying-Hsiung Chou and Dr. Shun-Liang Chao for their keen insight and valuable suggestions; the thesis would not have reached this far without their great help. Sincere appreciation also to Dr. Eric K. W. Yu; the two years’ TA job he provided me was a huge aid to my life, and the working experience was really a beneficial and pleasant one. Thanks also to Miss Lu-Ying Chen and Miss Ya-Ling Chen for helping me in various aspects for the past four years.

My genuine gratitude must go to my family. They didn’t say much or ask much, but their tacit support and understanding for the nocturnal son/brother left me with no worries. Thanks also to Ms. Shu-Fen Wang and Mr. Zhi-Hao Lo and my working colleagues, who kept granting me convenience to my unfinished studies.

I’d also like to thank George Lucas for creating the incredible films and all the philosophers in the free will debate for bringing up a wondrous and inspiring discussion. Both the films and various theories have left a chunk of food for thought for the rest of my life.

Finally, I would like to express my special appreciation to Yu-Jung Yen. There were times when the road was rough and rugged, but fortunately I had you in company. You always listened to whatever I had in mind attentively, even when you didn’t really understand what I was talking about, and you always stood up for me even when I had decided to bite my lips. Because of you, the writing journey was embellished with chromatic air and dulcet sounds. I was glad you were there, and I hope I can give you the same on your journey of writing.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chinese Abstract………..i

Abstract………..ii

Acknowledgements...………iii

Introduction………1

Chapter 1: “The Choice To Take It Is Yours Alone.”……….4

Existentialism and Humanism………4

The Chosen One and The Free Man……….13

Chapter 2: “Nothing Happens by Accident.”………...33

Compatibilism………..34

Incompatibilism………36

Libertarianism………..39

Hard Determinism………42

Free Will and Moral Responsibility……….46

Chapter 3: “Always in Motion is the Future.”………..54

Living Without Free Will………..55

The Force As a Causal Power………...72

Austin-Style Examples and The “I”……….74

Conclusion………80

Introduction

Jedi versus Sith. Light versus Dark. In the Star Wars universe, nearly all of the characters can be easily categorized—they are either good or evil. Yet among them, one person is difficult to be morally judged. Like most of us human beings, he

struggles to achieve his ideals, but he has defects, and he makes mistakes. This person is Anakin Skywalker, arguably the protagonist throughout the whole Star Wars saga. From the highly anticipated ―Chosen One‖ to the avatar of terror, Darth Vader, Anakin through his predicaments and dilemmas epitomizes an issue that no one can avoid: the issue of choice. Not purely good, nor purely evil, ever since his encounter with a Jedi master, Anakin had never stopped questioning what he should do. On the one hand, he didn‘t want to disappoint those who laid great hope on him to restore balance to the Force, but on the other, he refused to give up what he believed he had to do. One is a high ideal; the other gives meaning to him. The two eventually conflicted, and choices were inevitable. The problem is, there seemed to be a power invisibly directing

everything‘s occurring and proceeding. While Anakin thought he made his choices out of his free will, was the fact really as what he believed? Even though in the end it seemed to be that it is Anakin himself who fulfilled the prophecy, the question could still be legitimately asked: Was it Anakin who made the choices? Or the choices had already been made for him?

Anakin Skywalker‘s dissimilarities to the other characters, or his idiosyncratic and situational similarities to most of us human beings, make him not only a unique character in the Star Wars series, but a character worth probing into, especially the issue brought out with him: Is man free to create his own fate, or is the fate already determined? Ever since human beings‘ thinking reached a certain higher level, the discussion of the problem of free will has never stopped, and, contrary to the common belief, there are arguments and evidence showing it is probable that free will—the

thing whose existence most of us take for granted—may not actually exist. Amidst the sundry discussions and explorations on the title of Star Wars, religions, myths, cultures, technology, and plots are the frequent topics; only a few tackle issues related to free will. Jason T. Eberl in his ―‗You Cannot Escape Your Destiny‘ (Or Can You?): Freedom and Predestination in the Skywalker Family‖ seems to assume the existence of free will, from which he concludes that since human beings are ―radically free,‖ they are responsible for what they choose to will; Jan-Erik Jones‘ ―‗Size Matters Not‘: The Force as the Causal Power of the Jedi‖ focuses on the

omnipresent Force in the Star Wars series and treats it as a kind of causal power which, albeit its recognizablility as a ―cause,‖ distinguishes itself from other ―causes‖ by its mysterious and unidentifiable nature; John Lyden‘s ―Apocalyptic Determinism and

Star Wars‖ deals with determinism in the Star Wars saga from an apocalyptic aspect,

and Lyden links Anakin Skywalker‘s inevitable fate with the ―predestinarian apocalyptic thinking‖ existing in the contemporary world—―an age of

uncertainty‖—where the idea that we are free is too strong for people to accept. Inspired by Anakin Skywalker and the discussions mentioned above, in this thesis I intend to explore the issue of free will via Anakin—his life and death, his choices, and his fate. The thesis is divided into three chapters: in the first chapter, Sartre‘s main argument of absolute free will would be examined through the stories of Anakin and Orestes. While the human value Sartre keeps emphasizing lies in the existence of free will which in turn lies in the action of free choices, the premise is problematic. How can we know our action is really free? Even if God doesn‘t exist, there is still reason to believe that we actually don‘t have freedom of choices at all, for determinism exists as a more compelling controlling force than God. Without solving this problem, Sartre‘s absolute free will and absolute responsibility would have no ground to stand. Therefore, in chapter two, the threats and effects of determinism to

free choices and free will would be probed into, by viewing the four theories

revolving around determinism: Compatabilism, Incompatabilism, Libertarianism, and Hard Determinism. Finally, in chapter three, we will see how human beings could lead their lives if absolute free will and absolute responsibility are impossible. Choices are what human beings face every day, how can we deal with the fact that there is no real freedom in choices? Perhaps without absolute free will, there is still a kind of ―conditional‖ free will for humans to hold onto as the ground of responsibility. What this conditional free will is and how it could survive in a determined world will be addressed thoroughly. And with this freedom of will, mayhap Anakin‘s life could be seen from another aspect, a life still of responsibility and meanings.

Chapter 1: “The Choice To Take It Is Yours Alone.”

A Jedi will come To destroy the Sith And bring balance to the Force1

The two scenes in Star Wars that leave lasting impressions are when Anakin Skywalker chose to ally himself with the Sith Lord in Episode III, and when Darth Vader—the name given to the fallen Skywalker—chose to sacrifice himself to save his son in Episode VI. Viewers are obsessed with these scenes, not only because they served the turning points of the whole story, but because they stimulate our deep concerns about choice. In the end, beneath the seemingly gratifying redemption of Anakin, there was turbulence ready to overthrow the tranquility. Recalling the prophecy, we wonder, ―Did he make the choices out of his free will, or was he

manipulated by the mysterious Force all his life?‖ The question is like a splinter in our mind, for free will is not only about the freedom to do things we want, but also about whether we can be responsible for ourselves, which is a crux for a meaningful life.

Jean-Paul Sartre is one of the most ardent advocators of free will. In his work

Existentialism and Humanism, Sartre expounds his ideas about freedom, choice, and

responsibility, which could serve as a starting point for the discussion of free will.

Existentialism and Humanism

Throughout his life, Anakin Skywalker made several crucial choices, each having profound and significant influences not only on himself, but also on others, especially those surrounding him. Human beings face the same situation. Choices are

1

Windham, Ryher. Star Wars Jedi vs. Sith: The Essential Guide to the Force. New York: Del Rey, 2007. 205.

inevitable, and one‘s choices are often not just about oneself.

The ability to choose, or more specifically, the ―freedom‖ to choose, is a

significant feature, as Jean-Paul Sartre contends, that marks humans as ―free‖ beings. In his Existentialism and Humanism, the freedom of man is delineated under the premise that God doesn‘t exist. As Sartre articulates the tenet as thus, ―Dostoievsky once wrote ‗If God did not exist, everything would be permitted‘ . . . Everything is indeed permitted if God does not exist, and man is in consequence forlorn, for he cannot find anything to depend upon either within or outside himself‖ (33-4). Out of this atheistic premise derives the ―absolute freedom‖ of man. Freedom is vital in Sartre‘s philosophy because only on the ground of freedom can man become his own master, shaping his life and giving it meaning by himself. Having no predestined purpose or meaning to fulfill, man is free to choose and to make his life according to his will. As Julian Baggini puts it, ―If God does not exist, humanity has no creator, and if it has no creator it has no predetermined essence. Rather, humanity first exists, and then as its self awareness increases, the individual confronts herself, and is able to choose, to will for herself her own nature, purposes and values‖ (118). In other words, Sartre‘s absolute freedom is the absolute freedom ―of will.‖ Only with this absolute freedom of will can one choose what actions he would take.

When Sartre‘s says ―existence comes before essence‖ (26; emphasis original), he clearly has in mind this absolute freedom. He says, ―What do we mean by saying that existence precedes essence? We mean that man first of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world—and defines himself afterwards‖ (28). Christine Daigle gives a more elaborate account, specifying man‘s infinite possibilities coming along with his absolute freedom. She explicates that, ―One can define a human being only provisionally as this human being lives. For, there is always a chance that this person will change radically. However, once life is over, once one ceases to exist, one can be

defined, and this definition will be true forever‖ (51). That is to say, man is always in the process of making himself. He continues to be an existence and only at the moment of death does he become an essence. The possibility of a change or changes, even if they are not ―radical,‖ indicates that no determined human nature is in an individual. Whatever and whoever he wills to be always depend upon his freedom to choose; his ―nature‖ is only created by himself.

According to Sartre, following the non-existence of God, not only is there no determined nature in individuals, but no universal human nature: ―[T]here is no

human nature, because there is no God to have a conception of it. Man simply is‖ (28). Therefore, human ―values,‖ including moral values, are created along with one‘s essence, rather than ―being there‖ for human beings to follow. For this reason, Sartre is against the so called ―secular morality,‖ which claims that even if God doesn‘t exist, there must always be a priori values inscribed in an intelligible heaven in order for this world to be moral and law-abiding. This is the view taken by the traditional humanists, who argue that ―though God did not exist, or is nor worth believing in, there could still be a prior moral values which society could follow. Removing God would thus leave our moral framework more or less intact‖ (Baggini 122).

However, Sartre believes that fading with God are also the a priori values, a point where his existential humanism differs from traditional humanism. He contends:

The existentialist, on the contrary, finds it extremely embarrassing that God does not exist, for there disappears with Him all possibility of finding values in an intelligible heaven. There can no longer be any good a priori, since there is no infinite and perfect consciousness to think it. It is nowhere written that ―the good‖ exists, that one must be honest or must not lie, since we are now upon the plane where there are only men. (33)

human beings, even if they don‘t like it, can only exercise their freedom to ―invent‖ the values most suitable for them. Values are connected with human essence; both are yet to be created by each individual. This ―subjectivity‖ in inventing values is crucial in Sartre‘s thoughts, for it distinguishes man from other objects. As Baggini says, ―It is the fact that humans possess a subjective life which marks them out from other things and places on them responsibility for what they are‖ (119).

While being absolute free means human beings can choose without limits, it at the same time makes them have nothing to lean upon except for themselves. This state of ―abandonment‖ puts human beings in ―despair,‖ the state in which human beings can find no one to rely upon and no a priori values to follow; they can only ―act without hope‖ (39). ―Hope‖ here means the ―hope that things will come to pass

without our making them so‖ (Baggini 125). Human beings cannot rely upon any kind of such hope, since there is no God and no universal human nature—since they are absolutely free. The seemingly paradoxical result is that, human beings must ―limit‖ themselves to things he can be sure of, that is, what one can achieve through one‘s action.

While the argument that one has to limit oneself even though he has absolute freedom sounds paradoxical, it in fact is not. The point is, it is true that with absolute freedom, one can definitely choose to depend upon people or things that are not completely known to him, but beyond this ―choosing,‖ none is sure to him anymore. To spend one‘s freedom on people or things one has no complete control is to waste one‘s freedom. The freedom ought to be spent on what one can be sure of, and that is one‘s action. As Sartre articulates, ―[O]ne does not rely upon any possibilities beyond those that are strictly concerned in one‘s action. Beyond the point at which the

possibilities under consideration cease to affect my action, I ought to disinterest myself‖ (39). Here we can see the link between the absolute freedom of will and

actions. It is because one has the freedom of will that his actions are under his control. Without the absolute free will, even what one does cannot be what one is sure of.

That is the situation human beings face in this world: absolute freedom within oneself, with nothing and no one to cling to. Thus, when Sartre claims ―man is condemned to be free‖ (34), it has at least two layers of meaning. One the one hand, ―we are born without any say in the matter (hence condemned), but thereafter free to choose our own destiny‖(Baggini 122). On the other hand, no matter we like it or not, freedom is something we cannot deny, which is a real trouble for those who are used to the guidance of God. As Daigle puts it, ―freedom is not something that we can escape. It is a fundamental structure of the for-self: we are as free‖ (49).

Coming along with the absolute freedom is the ―absolute responsibility,‖ which concerns not just oneself, but also to other men. Sartre argues,

If, however, it is true that existence is prior to essence, man is responsible for what he is. Thus, the first effect of existentialism is that it puts every man in possession of himself as he is, and places the entire responsibility for his existence squarely upon his own shoulders. And, when we say that man is responsible for himself, we do not mean that he is responsible only for his own individuality, but that he is responsible for all men. (29)

How is it that man is responsible for all men? Because, according to Sartre, when one chooses for himself, he simultaneously chooses for all men. The reason is, when a person chooses what actions he will take and what values he will endorse in order to make himself the man he wants to be, he is also shaping an ―image of man‖ in

accordance to his ideal image. His responsibility thus spreads out to all men. As Sartre says,

If, moreover, existence precedes essence and we will to exist at the same time as we fashion our image, that image is valid for all and for the entire

epoch in which we find ourselves. Our responsibility is thus much greater than we had supposed, for it concerns mankind as a whole. . . . I am thus responsible for myself and for all men, and I am creating a certain image of man as I would have him to be. In fashioning myself I fashion man. (29-30) Facing several options, why we choose one way rather than the other is because we affirm the value of what is chosen. Although we cannot hope that all the other persons would do as we did when facing similar situations since there is no universal human nature, al least we can hope that our chosen actions would set up examples, examples that may have ripple effects.

What ensues from the absolute responsibility is ―anguish,‖ which is the anxiety one feels when facing a choice, owing to the realization that when he chooses he chooses for all. Sartre claims, ―When a man commits himself to anything, fully

realizing that he is not only choosing what he will be, but is thereby at the same time a legislator deciding for the whole mankind—in such a moment a man cannot escape from the sense of complete and profound responsibility‖ (30). The realization of the thorough responsibility causes anguish, and furthermore, since no one can ever avoid choices, no one can ever be rid of anguish. Those who do not show such anxiety are either ―disguising their anguish or are in flight from it‖ (30), according to Sartre.

Sartre cites the story of Abraham, called ―the anguish of Abraham‖ by Kierkegaard, to exemplify the unavoidable anguish. Abraham hesitated upon the message from an angel who told him to immolate his son. This was God‘s command; the angel told him so. Not knowing whether the angel was really an angel, whether the message was really from the divine, and whether he was really ―that‖ Abraham to perform this task, Abraham could only decide all by himself. He must choose. The anguish derives not only from the fact that his choice would change his son‘s life, but also from the fact that in choosing he would be setting examples for all the mankind

to follow. As Sartre puts it,

If a voice speaks to me, it is still I myself who must decide whether the voice is or is not that of an angel. If I regard a certain course of action as good, it is only I who choose to say that it is good and not bad. There is nothing to show that I am Abraham: nevertheless I also am obliged at every instance to perform actions which are examples. Everything happens to every man as though the whole human race had its eyes fixed upon what he is doing and regulated its conduct accordingly‖ (31-2).

Because of this the absolute responsibility for mankind, when making a choice, one should always ask oneself what would happen if everyone does the same as one is doing, rather than deceiving oneself that his choice has only to do with himself. In other words, being free, a person must always ask himself, ―Am I really a man who has the right to act in such manner that humanity regulates itself by what I do?‖(32). Only by keeping one‘s absolute freedom in mind and facing one‘s anguish can one be a truly responsible person.

However, this anguish is too heavy a burden that many seek to cut themselves from it by denying its source: absolute freedom. They deny their freedom by claiming that their acts and choices are determined by factors beyond their control. In Sartre‘s words, they appeal to ―bad faith,‖ embracing values prescribed by God, for instance, or seeking excuses from determinism. While Sartre has articulated the non-existence of God to ensure man‘s freedom in the very beginning, how about determinism, the belief, in short, that every thing has a cause and nothing can escape the cause-effect relation, including human beings? As he denies the existence of God, Sartre simply denies determinism. ―[T]here is no determinism—man is free, man is freedom‖ (34; emphasis original). Sartre doesn‘t think anything would undermine man‘s absolute freedom, and thus he despises those who attempt to hide from it. Such people are

―cowards‖ in his eyes. He says, ―Those who hide from this total freedom, in a guise of solemnity or with deterministic excuses, I shall call cowards‖ (52).

To this point, Sartre‘s main ideas are linked in this way: since God and

determinism don‘t exist, human beings have absolute freedom (of the will); deriving from the absolute freedom is absolute responsibility, in the sense that when one chooses, one chooses for all; this responsibility for all men causes anguish, the necessary pain for free men to endure. However, Sartre‘s freedom isn‘t without boundaries. Some argue that, even if it is true that human beings possess the absolute freedom of the will so that we can choose without constrains, there are still limits put on us, limits that are not under our control—namely, the ―condition‖ that humans are born with. The external limitations caused by the human condition can be divided into two kinds. There are variable historical limitations, such as being born as a slave or as a king, a proletarian or a bourgeois, and born on a country or a desert. And there are invariable ones like our mortality and physical needs.

But is the human condition ―obstacle‖ to our freedom? Not necessarily. One must note that, while these external limitations are beyond our control so that they define each man‘s fundamental situation a priori, this doesn‘t mean that they are completely foreign matters to us and thus invade and threaten our freedom. According to Sartre, the human condition, or the limits put on humans, is not only objective, but also subjective. ―Objective, because we meet with them everywhere and they are everywhere recognizable; and subjective because they are lived and are nothing if man does not live them—if, that is to say, he does not freely determine himself and his existence in relation to them‖ (46; emphasis original). In other words, these limits are objective because they apply to everyone, and subjective because our freedom of the will has to work in relation with them. It is the latter—the subjectivity of the human condition—that make human beings inseparable from the limits, either in a

good way, or in a bad way.

Because of these limits on us, our choices of how to live them can be totally different. One the one hand, we can be more positive in pursuing our purposes if we ―choose to‖. It‘s true that there are external limitations on us, but our will is still

absolutely free; we can still be masters of ourselves. If one chooses to surpass the

limits, not only would his condition be no hindrance to him, but it can be a drive pushing him further toward his purposes. For example, though young Anakin was born a slave and lived on a desert planet, he never gave up his dream to become a Jedi. Rather, these limits make him a person who seized every opportunity, and that‘s the major reason why his encounter with Qui-Gon became ―fatal.‖ On the other hand, not every one has the resolution to exercise his freedom on the limits; some just choose to succumb to them and give up pursuing his purposes, either from an early stage of life, or from a later occasion of thwarting. They disclaim their freedom in this way.

Therefore, what those limits would be to an individual‘s freedom hinges on what he ―chooses‖ to live them. They can be impetus or impediment, all depending on human beings‘ freedom of the will. Sartre says, ―[E]very human purpose presents itself as an attempt either to surpass these limitations, or to widen them, or else to deny or to accommodate oneself to them‖ (46). The human conditions themselves don‘t deprive human beings of their absolute freedom; it‘s humans themselves who would choose to surrender it to the limitations, just as some surrender it to God or determinism.

Bringing out the human condition, Sartre‘s absolute freedom becomes more realistic and understandable. After all, even with the absolute freedom of the will, one still cannot do whatever he wills to do. While the various historical limitations could be troublesome enough, what really ―limits‖ human beings is the fact that the human body is at the very beginning not a product of the ―owner‘s‖ will. A part of an

individual is ―not his‖ ever since, or before, he was born. But Sartre‘s point is still valid: our absolute freedom of the will is not undermined by the innate limits, and who we will become can still be completely determined by ourselves. When he conceives the freedom of human beings, definitely he doesn‘t consider the absolute ―physical‖ freedom as a necessity. Absolute physical freedom is not only

unreasonable, but also ―inhuman.‖ Namely, that would make human beings close to the very concept that he rejects: God. It is because there are physical limits that human beings ―are‖ human beings, and it is because there are physical limits that human beings‘ free will is meaningful. As Michael Mckenna argues, ―[A]ll of [the human acts] involve the prospect of failure and the demands of an effort of will forced up against the boundaries of what one can do‖ (236), and it is in ―pressing the

boundaries of what one is capable of, pressing the boundaries of the limits placed upon one‖ (236) that human acts and human freedom become meaningful. In other words, albeit a bit paradoxical, the value of freedom requires that we lack it

somewhere.

Sartre emphasizes on freedom, and he even calls this freedom ―absolute.‖ But the absoluteness doesn‘t mean omnipotence. By introducing the human condition, Sartre demarcates the different freedoms, and the absoluteness stops at the freedom of the will. It is free will that truly matters, since it is this freedom that makes responsibility and the ensuing anguish possible. In the next section, along with Orestes from Sartre‘s

The Flies, we will see how Sartre‘s idea of freedom sheds light on the choices of

Anakin Skywalker, and where it might be insufficient.

The Chosen One and The Free Man

Anakin Skywalker was considered the ―chosen one‖ who would restore balance to the Force, according to the ancient prophecy. On the other hand, Orestes was also

believed as the one who would end the pain of Argos. While these two seem to be ―destined‖ to accomplish some tasks, there is a major difference between them: A mysterious power—the Force—seemed to have paved the way for Anakin, whereas Orestes created his own path, even God couldn‘t stop him. But was Anakin really unfree and Orestes really free? Before these questions are delved into, a whole picture of each one‘s life and an examination of each one‘s significant choices may give us some clue about their ―freedom.‖

The ancient Jedi prophecy said, when there is an upheaval in the Force, a Chosen One would appear to restore balance to the Force. Anakin Skywalker was only a nine years old slave when he was found by Jedi Master Qui-Gon Jin on the desert planet Tatooine. Young as he was, Anakin was believed by Qui-Gon to be the Chosen One owing to the highest count of the midi-chlorians2—―a microscopic lifeform that resides within all living cells and communicates with the Force‖(Star Wars Episode I:

The Phantom Menace, 1999). One of young Skywalker‘s dreams was to become a

Jedi Knight; therefore under Qui-Gon‘s suggestion, he decided to go with him to receive the proper training. Although his age was considered by other Jedi Masters to be too old for training and his fate to be clouded, under Qui-Gon‘s insistence and his unexpected death, Anakin was eventually accepted by the Jedi and became the padawan (i.e. apprentice) of Obi-Wan Kenobi. Time went by, and Skywalker showed his great potential. However, unlike the other Jedi who dedicated themselves to the Jedi principles, Anakin had his own ideas about what kind of life he wanted to lead and what kind of person he wanted to be. Love, forbidden to the Jedi, was what he never gave up pursuing. But that was the seed of a tragedy. In order to save his wife,

2

According to the official Star Wars encyclopedia, the medi-chlorian is defined as the following: ―A microscopic lifeform that resided within all living cells and was capable of communicating with the Force. Symbionts found in all beings, midi-chlorians might be responsible for all life. They could reveal the will of the Force when one‘s mind was quiet. Those beings with a high concentration of midi-chlorians in their blood could become Jedi.‖ See Sansweet, Stephen J and Pablo Hidalgo. The

Padmé Amidala, from death, Anakin made his choice to ally himself with the Sith Lord who promised him what he sought, and became the Sith apprentice Darth Vader. After being terribly wounded by Obi-Wan, Vader was transformed into a half-machine. Learning Padmé‘s death, Vader‘s sole purpose was retribution—to hunt down all the remaining Jedi. Among them, his son Luke Skywalker was his foremost target. However, in the end, while witnessing Luke dying under the Sith Lord‘s lightning attack, Vader decided to sacrifice himself to destroy the master of the Dark Side. Balance was finally restored to the Force, and the prophecy fulfilled.

As to Orestes, he was the son of Agamemnon. His hometown Argos was plagued with the flies—the incarnation of the Furies—ever since the former king was

murdered by Aegistheus and Clytemnestra. Back to Argos, Orestes, disguised as ―Philebus,‖ found that the city was remorse-stricken because the present king Aegistheus made them believe that they all shared the crime of the murder of

Agamemnon. Wishing to find a place in his hometown and among his people, Orestes, after re-uniting with his sister Electra, planned to take revenge on the murderers. In the whole course of events, Zeus made continual presence in order to impede Orestes for fear that the result would render him powerless above the Argives, because ―[o]nce freedom lights its beacon in a man‘s heart, the gods are powerless against him‖ (102). And the fact was, human beings were free right after God had created them. Zeus couldn‘t allow this realization; only the unfree actions—repentance and remorse—could serve his ends. He divulged Orestes‘ plan to Aegistheus, as well as dissuading Orestes with cajolement and threats, yet all to no avail. Orestes killed Aegistheus and Clytemnestra without remorse or the sense of guilt, because he knew he was free and he embraced his freedom. In the end, although Orestes couldn‘t save Electra, who fled to the shelter of Zeus owing to the desire to repudiate the

free—to the Argives, and took all their crimes upon his shoulders. Telling the story of the pied piper, Orestes left Argos with the Furies chasing after him.

The common ground between Anakin and Orestes is clear: both of them believed they were free, and thus chose in accordance with their intentions and purposes. Either the Force or Zeus cannot obstruct them from exercising their ―absolute freedom.‖ Some may argue that Anakin was ―destined‖ to be the Chosen One because there was a prophecy waiting to be fulfilled. But, just as what Sartre points out when discussing Abraham‘s story, neither was there evidence that the prophecy was true, nor was there any proof that Anakin Skywalker was the real Chosen One. Everything is just out of sheer speculation. Therefore, there is no big difference between Orestes and Anakin Skywalker concerning their acts. Both of them acted freely and chose their values. However, while Sartre‘s ideas of freedom can sufficiently and straightly explain the choices and actions of Orestes, things are complicated in Anakin Skywalker. Take a look at the crucial choices in Anakin‘s life, and it would be obvious where the

complication lies. These choices includes: to leave home to become a Jedi, to revenge the death of his mother, to ally himself with the Sith, and to save his son.

In the first case, it is not hard to see that it‘s a dilemma for young Anakin. His dream was not just to become a Jedi, but to free all the slaves on Tatooine. He once told Qui-Gon, ―I had a dream that I was a Jedi. I came back here and freed all the slaves . . . .‖ (Episode I) He had the ambition, and was eager to achieve his goal. On the other hand, however, he didn‘t want to be separated from his mother, Shmi

Skywalker, who raised him alone due to the direct conception from the midi-chlorians. He loved his mother. When learning that she wasn‘t freed like him, Anakin hesitated. He didn‘t know whether he should go or not. He told his mother, ―I want to stay with you. I don‘t want things to change.‖ And Shmi replied, ―You can‘t stop change any more than you can stop the suns from setting. Listen to your feelings; Annie, you

know what‘s right.‖

In effect, it is a choice quite similar to that of Sartre‘s pupil, who was hesitating whether to join the army to fight for the country and avenge his brother or to stay with his mother whose only family left was the young man. Sartre‘s solution to this

dilemma is also quite similar to what Shmi replied to his son. He says, ―If values are uncertain, if they are still too abstract to determine the particular, concrete case under consideration, nothing remains but to trust in our instincts. That is what this young man tried to do; and when I saw him he said, ‗In the end, it is feeling that counts . . .‘‖ (36). Just as Sartre‘s advice to his pupil, Shmi didn‘t told Anakin what to do, but asked him to ―listen to the feelings‖ and to choose ―what is right.‖ No more a slave, Anakin must free his mind as well; he had to make the choice according to his free will. In fact, it is not the first time Shmi gave her son such advice. When counseling his mother if he ―could‖ go with Qui-Gon, Anakin received these words from Shmi: ―This path has been placed for you, Annie; the choice to take it is yours alone.‖ As a free person, with nothing and no one to depend upon, Anakin made his choice to go, and left this promise to his mother: ―I…will become a Jedi and I will come back and free you, Mom…I promise.‖ (Episode I) In making this choice, he also chose and invented the value that he was willing to endorse, rather than follow any existed value that was not and could never be his. But, can this exercise of one‘s free will be enough to guarantee a life without remorse, as Sartre contends?

Things went beyond expectation. In Episode II, Anakin, now a young man, dreamt that his mother was in suffering, and decided to go back to Tatooine. But what awaited him was the news that his mother was captured by Tusken Raiders. Anakin went on an immediate rescue, but only able to see his mother for the last time. This loss was barely bearable, and in front of the tomb of Shmi, Anakin said, ―I wasn‘t strong enough to save you, Mom. I wasn‘t strong enough. But I promise I won‘t fail

again. Someday I will be the most powerful Jedi ever.‖ (Episode II) Though these words seemingly suggest that Anakin was not regretful about the choice to leave his mother, no one could be certain what path he would choose if time should reverse. He didn‘t express repentance about his choice because originally he wished to achieve both goals—becoming a Jedi and free the slaves, and be with his mother. Both are right choices, differing only in the levels: one is unselfish, and the other is private. Therefore, Anakin didn‘t regret that he chose to become a Jedi, but, he did regret something. He regretted that he didn‘t choose to stay with his mother, and that‘s why he made the promise that he would not fail ―again‖ in front of Shmi‘s tomb.

Sartre contends the individual is in despair; there‘s nothing and no one to depend upon, but the individual himself. From this, he claims, ―[T]here is no reality except in action. . . . Man is nothing else but what he purposes, he exists only in so far as he realizes himself; he is therefore nothing else but the sum of his actions, nothing else but what his life is‖ (41). In other words, it is ―actions‖ that define man. Therefore, to blame or regret something that one doesn‘t do is pointless, for how can he be sure he would definitely achieve the goal without actually doing it? As Baggini articulates, ―On Sartre‘s view, one cannot blame circumstances for what one hasn‘t done. . . . Why attribute to someone the ability to do precisely what she hasn‘t done? . . . Because ‗you are nothing else but what you live,‘ it is only by action that we make ourselves what we are‖ (123). In this light, Anakin‘s remorse about not staying with mother was pointless. How could he know if he had stayed, he would then have been able to protect his mother? To regret something one hasn‘t done is meaningless, according to Sartre.

But, this argument cannot really save one from such remorse. It is no doubt that when Anakin was considering which path to take, he was in anguish, not so much because he realized that he chose for all as because he wanted to make a ―right‖

choice, or a ―relatively good‖ choice. As David Detmer contends, ―Indeed, why should anyone feel anguish at the prospect of having to make a choice unless it

matters a good deal whether or not I make the right choice, or at least, whether or not

I make a relatively good choice?‖(173; emphases original). And Anakin‘s remorse upon the choice he didn‘t make is just a continuation of that anguish. Indeed it is true that Anakin couldn‘t be certain he could have protected his mother if he had chosen to stay, but it is equally true that no one can be certain that he couldn‘t have done it. He was in remorse because he was wondering if the choice to stay with his mother was ―better,‖ since both the choices to leave or stay are ―good.‖

Of course, a direct question comes from this point is about the ―good‖ or ―bad‖ and ―right‖ or ―wrong‖? What kinds of choices are good/right and what kinds are not? And who set the standard? In terms of Sartre‘s contention, values are invented and every choice made out of freedom is ―good‖ and ―right.‖ However, while Sartre‘s points can explain Orestes‘ actions and choices sufficiently enough, it fails to account for the more subtle situations as we see of Anakin. Orestes didn‘t face a similar dilemma as that of Anakin and thus had no anguish as to which right choice to make, let alone the remorse for what one didn‘t do. But from Anakin we see that even if every free choice is right, there are still cases in which one wish to know which choice is ―better,‖ and that‘s a fairly frequent reason for anguish. Perhaps it is pointless to dwell on the past since the responsibility one should take is that of prospection rather than that of retrospection; however, it is not pointless to try to figure out which choice was the better one, for that‘s one major way human beings prevent themselves from being remorseful again.

From this choice Anakin made, we know that anguish doesn‘t just derive from the realization that when one chooses, he chooses for all, but also from the fact that he wants to know which choice is better when being confronted with two or more good

choices. Furthermore, even if there are no a priori moral values, one would still be in repentance for his choice when he wants to find out whether it would be better if he had chosen the other option. These points concerning anguish and repentance are the phenomena we don‘t see on Orestes, and where Sartre‘s theory cannot explain

adequately. The following choices of Anakin would show other situations of remorse, and the contrast between Anakin and Orestes would be more obvious.

The second crucial choice is the choice to avenge his mother. After Shmi died in his hands, Anakin out of sadness and anger took his lightsaber and went out the tent. What follows was a massacre; all of the Tusken Raiders were killed, including women and children. Later he confessed to Padmé his terrible deed in a voice mixed by anger and dolor and remorse. He trembled, shouting, ―It‘s all Obi-wan‘s fault. He‘s jealous. He‘s holding me back. . . . I killed them. I killed them all. They‘re all dead, every single one of them. And not just the men, but the women and the children, too.

They‘re animals, and I slaughtered them like an animal. I HATE THEM!‖ (Episode II). This time Anakin felt regretful not because he was wondering which choice—the choice to kill the Tusken Raiders and the choice to leave in peace—was better, but because he understood clearly he had made a wrong choice out of freedom.

Some may argue that he didn‘t make the choice out of his freedom because at that time he was overwhelmed by passions resulting from his mother‘s death. But can passion be a reason to rescind one‘s responsibility for a choice? For Sartre, passion is not an excuse at all, let alone a reason. He claims that, ―The existentialist does not believe in the power of passion. He will never regard a grand passion as a destructive torrent upon which a man is swept into certain actions as by fate, and which, therefore, is an excuse for them. He thinks that man is responsible for his passion‖ (34). For Sartre, letting oneself fall into his passion is already a ―choice,‖ and the individual must be responsible for it and its consequences. As Baggini expounds,

Many people claim that they could not help what they did, because they were swept away by passion of one sort or another. This is one way of saying that their actions were not freely chosen, but part of some causal chain over which they had no control. Sartre claims this is little more than an excuse. He follows a line of reasoning which echoes Aristotle, who claimed that we are doubly responsible for actions committed when drunk: we are to blame for putting ourselves into a drunken state and for the

subsequent action. The same could be said for passion. By the time we have been swept away by passion, we have effectively already made our choice. Our choices put us in a situation where passion would take effect, but as we chose to put ourselves in that position, we cannot avoid responsibility. (123) Therefore, anger and sorrow and whatever any other passion couldn‘t save Anakin from his responsibility for his wrong choice, for it is he himself who let him be swept away by the passions, not anyone else.

Anakin didn‘t attempt to find any excuse, actually. Though he mentioned

Obi-wan, the person who he was really reproaching was himself. He knew clearly his deed was wrong and repentance derived from it. Repentance as a way of showing responsibility is another phenomenon we don‘t see in Sartre. ―To choose between this or that is at the same time to affirm the value of that which is chosen; for we are unable ever to choose the worse. What we choose is always the better . . . .‖ (Sartre 29). And the most pertinent example for this argument is Orestes‘ killing his mother. In order to become one of the Argives and liberate the suffering citizens, Orestes performed his killing without hesitation, even when he raised his sword in front of his mother. And he showed no remorse, because, as he said, ―I am free. Beyond anguish, beyond remorse. Free. And at one with myself. (111). This is a significant contrast between him and Anakin. Both performed killing, but the one who killed his own

mother walked away peacefully, whereas the one who killed for his mother was upset by the ensuing remorse. Are free actions really free from remorse? Apparently not. In addition to the fact that Orestes only killed the murderers whereas Anakin killed the innocent, it should also be noted that Anakin made the choice out of his freedom and he didn‘t refute the responsibility ensuing from it. And, it is this understanding of his freedom that makes him regret having made the choice.

Sartre‘s theory of freedom cannot give an account of this phenomenon. Or it can be said that he doesn‘t consider a wrong choice made out of freedom is possible. His logic is this: when one makes a choice out of his free will, he is willing to endorse this choice as well as the consequences. That is to say, if one feels he should not make a choice, then he just will not make it, since he is free. However, there are indeed cases where one doesn‘t consider his free decision wrong till later retrospection, as shown by Anakin. In fact, a character do present similar reactions in The Flies—Electra. Though the play depicts her as one who fled from her freedom and responsibility, aren‘t her reactions to the killing of her mother—fear, sorrow, and remorse—the reactions considered ―human‖? Further, while Sartre claims that remorse is a reaction to abandon one‘s freedom so as to repudiate one‘s responsibility, Anakin‘s remorse shows that remorse can also stem from a choice for which one is willing to take responsibility.

Therefore, Anakin‘s killing brings out two phenomena Sartre‘s freedom is unable to account for. First, a freely chosen decision can be a wrong one, and second,

remorse can result from one‘s willing to take responsibility for a wrong act. Although contrary to the characteristics Orestes exhibited, these two phenomena are not merely exceptional. Why would one consider a freely chosen act wrong? Just because values are freely chosen, a former chosen value can be replaced by a newly chosen one, in the course when a human being‘s identity is never set or determined, but keeping

changing along with his choices. So, considering an action wrong in retrospection is not only possible but also reasonable; the later ―right‖ choice doesn‘t have to

guarantee the rightness of a former one or be in the same stream of thoughts.

And is it really required to consider remorse an unnecessary reaction, even in the case of killing one‘s mother? Of course, we cannot blame Orestes simply for his matricide. He has a more noble purpose to achieve, and that purpose is the value he freely chosen rather than the life of his mother. On the other hand, Anakin‘s killing is an action of revenge. But if it is true that when one chooses one chooses for all, wouldn‘t the agent‘s reaction be more like that of Anakin, namely, remorse not only for doing wrong, but also for fear that one‘s ―action‖ set an example? After all, it is ―actions‖ that define men, according to Sartre. Further, when Padmé, the person who supported Anakin the most, learned what he had done, what we saw on her face were shock and fear and pity. And, don‘t we find it uneasy when learning that Orestes had no remorse about his matricide? In respecting and promoting freedom, doesn‘t Orestes lose something crucial that makes him human? Robert Champigny argues, ―Orestes asserts he has no excuse and can have no remorse. Was it necessary to make Orestes claim that? A spectator might look at the shadow cast by the gesture, and wonder what it is a symptom of‖ (43). Remorse has a necessity to exist, it seems, not as a reaction to disclaim one‘s freedom and responsibility, but as one to secure them. The third choice to scrutinize is Anakin‘s choice to ally himself with the Sith. In

Episode III, having the premonition that Padmé would die in childbirth, Anakin was

seeking desperately the method to prevent it. Chancellor Palpatine, whose real identity was the Sith Lord, knew this, and was trying to take advantage of it to entice Anakin into joining the Sith. He, having been pretending to be a friend with Anakin ever since he came to receive the Jedi training, exercised his influences from two aspects. First, he attempted to shake Anakin‘s views on the Jedi and the Sith, or more specifically,

the views on good and evil. Seeing that Anakin was used by the Jedi to spy on him and that Anakin didn‘t feel comfortable about it, Palpatine began to present a compelling argument:

PALPATINE: Remember back to your early teachings, Anakin. ‗All those who gain power are afraid to lose it.‘ Even the Jedi.

ANAKIN: The Jedi use their power for good.

PALPATINE: Good is a point of view, Anakin. And the Jedi‘s point of view is not the only valid one. The Dark Lords of the Sith believe in security and justice also, yet they are considered by the Jedi to be…

ANAKIN: …evil.

PALPATINE: …from a Jedi‘s point of view. The Sith and the Jedi are similar in almost every way . . . .

ANAKIN: The Sith rely on their passion for their strength. They think inward, only about themselves.

PALPATINE: And the Jedi don‘t?

ANAKIN: The Jedi are selfless…they only care about others. PALPATINE: [smiles]

PALPATINE: Or so you‘ve been trained to believe. Why is it, then, that they have asked you to do something you feel is wrong?

ANAKIN: I‘m not sure it‘s wrong.

PALPATINE: Have they asked you to betray the Jedi codes? The

Constitution? A friendship? Your own values? Think. Consider their motives. Keep your mind clear of assumptions. The fear of losing power is a

weakness of both the Jedi and the Sith. ANAKIN: [deep in thought]

freedom. Unlike other Jedi, Anakin always had his own ideas about what to do and whom to be. He chose the values he identified with; breaking the Jedi principle to marry Padmé in secret was just one example. However, under the Jedi codes and the prophecy, he was forced to abide by some ordinances and take some actions which he didn‘t really identify with, despite the fact that the Jedi was viewed as the icon of the Good. Therefore, Palpatine‘s plan was that, he didn‘t ask for an immediate response from Anakin, but he definitely wished Anakin to realize in time that he had his own path, and he didn‘t have to follow the ―Good‖ of the Jedi but his own ―good,‖ just as Orestes realized that there was always ―his path‖ when he saw the blaze around the stone. And now the seed had been sown in Anakin‘s mind.

In addition to taking advantage of Anakin‘s confusion, Palpatine also employed his fear. Knowing that Anakin was afraid of the death of Padmé, he told him the story of Darth Plagueis, who ―had such a knowledge of the dark side that he could even keep the one he cared about from dying,‖ and indicated that ―The dark side of the Force is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural.‖ (Episode III) Anakin eagerly asked, ―Is it possible to learn this power?‖ Palpatine replied calmly and a bit scornfully, ―Not from a Jedi.‖ Another seed had thus been sown. What Palpatine was waiting for was the moment, hopefully not to far away, when both seeds broke through the dirt. Then Anakin had to make his choice.

From these, we can see that Palpatine was appealing to the core values Anakin had chosen: freedom and love. Though he had been immersed in the values of the Jedi, he never accepted them all without doubts. But freedom and love were what he

believed in, and he was willing to sacrifice for them. In the light of it, Anakin‘s choice to side with the Sith Lord is not a surprise. However, it certainly is not an easy one; there were always conflicts in his mind. Palpatine cleverly revealed his true identity to Anakin in a proper moment—a moment that left little time for Anakin to think more,

for the Jedi Council was prepared to take actions.

Learning Palpatine‘s true identity, Anakin, in shock and anger, ignited his lightsaber. But he didn‘t take a step further; he was hesitating. At the same time, Palpatine told him, ―I know what has been troubling you…Listen to me. Don‘t continue to be a pawn of the Jedi Council! Ever since I‘ve known you, you have been searching for a life greater than that of an ordinary Jedi…a life of significance, of conscience.‖ (Episode III) He was again touching Anakin‘s ―freedom.‖ Therefore, though Anakin claimed ―You‘re wrong!‖ and could kill the Sith Lord on the spot, he took no action, only deciding to turn him over to the Jedi Council.

ANAKIN: I am going to turn you over to the Jedi Council.

PALPATINE: Of course you should. But you‘re not sure of their intentions, are you? What if I am right and they are plotting to take over the Republic? ANAKIN: I will quickly discover the truth of all this.

PALPATINE: You have great wisdom, Anakin. Know the power of the dark side. The power to save Padmé.

ANAKIN: [staring at Palpatine for a moment] PALPATINE: [turning and moving to his office]

PALPATINE: I am not going anywhere. You have time to decide my fate. Perhaps you‘ll reconsider and help me rule the galaxy for the good of all… (Episode III)

Before Anakin left, what Palpatine flung to him was ―love.‖ In this brief confrontation, Palpatine appealed to Anakin‘s core values again and again to implant the idea that he was ―necessary.‖ Though Anakin seemed to follow the Jedi way to leave Palpatine for the Jedi Council, his leaving was actually a manifestation of conflicts in mind. He didn‘t know what to choose; he needed time to think about it.

Sith Lord. Anakin came at the right time: the two was in a stalemate. Each presented values he had once held, or still held dear. He had to choose now. Palpatine at this crucial moment appealed to Anakin‘s weakness: the fear to lose the one he loved. He cried out to him, ―I am your pathway to power. I have the power to save the one you love. You must choose. You must stop him.‖ (Episode III) As we saw above, in front of the tomb of his mother, Anakin made the promise that he wouldn‘t fail again to protect the one he loved. And now a similar situation was right in front of him: he could follow the Jedi way and made a selfless choice to destroy the Sith once and for all, in the price of a life—the life of his wife, or he could make a selfish choice to save her, in the price of many lives which would be destroyed by the Sith.

Although the situation is similar to the first choice when Anakin was to choose between becoming a Jedi and staying with his mother, the connotation is in effect a sheer contrast. In the first condition, both choices were concerned with the love for people, whereas in this condition, both choices indicated death. So it is proper to say that, this time, Anakin was not to choose a better way between two good choices, but to choose a ―less evil‖ one. A corpse or a land of corpses. Anakin understood this, and he was in anguish. Eventually, in order not to make the same tragedy he once

experienced, or trying to amend for the ―mistake,‖ he chose the latter. This fact made his crying ―What have I done?‖ after Windu‘s death more lachrymose. He was not regretting that he had sided with the Sith; that was the value he chose. Yet he was regretting that he had made a selfish choice, and many people would die because of it. However, as mentioned before, Anakin knew he was a free person, and he was willing to take responsibility for his freedom. Now that the choice was made, he would not let himself be in remorse for what he had done, but keep walking along the path he chose, and take what would be on his shoulders. And the first order given to him, now called Darth Vader, was to kill all the Jedi, including the younglings, in the Jedi Temple. This

task was completed.

If we follow Sartre‘s logic, this choice of Anakin was a right one for him, but it is also a painful one. After wiping out the Jedi in the temple and the Separatists leaders on the lava planet Mustafar, Anakin stood on the bridge above the lava. He tossed a gaze, not toward any target, but to his mind. His eyes were stern, and sad. Stern, because he knew the bloodshed was the necessary consequence of his choice, and he was not regretting for it; it was the price he must pay in order to save Padmé. Sad, because he knew the blood was avoidable, and he realized how different the situation was compared to his dream: he dreamt to be a savior to the slaves, but now he was a butcher, killing without hesitation.

Anakin made a difficult choice, perhaps the most difficult one in his life. Compared to it, the most dramatic choice Orestes made—the choice to kill his mother—lacks conflicts in mind, and there are several points of contrast worth pointing out. First, while Anakin sacrificed others to save his wife, Orestes sacrificed his mother to save the Argives. Second, although both killed resolutely after making the decision, Anakin‘s emotion was disturbed by his action, whereas Orestes only showed longanimity. Third, in addition to freedom, we see on Anakin another equally strong core value for him—love, but on Orestes, freedom was the most important one. It can be put that, Anakin killed for love, and Orestes killed for freedom. Or in a more precisely way, Anakin sacrificed his freedom and killed for love, while Orestes sacrificed his love and killed for freedom, his freedom and that of the Argives.

The last choice to examine is Vader‘s choice to save his son. To see why this choice is significant, it is necessary to know what happened to Vader after he stepped onto the path of the Sith. The betrayal and massacre led to the dual with his former master and mentor, Obi-Wan Kenobi. Vader was maimed terribly and thus defeated. When Darth Sidious, the Sith Lord, found him, his body was charred by the fire from

lava, yet he was still alive. The reason he didn‘t give up the will to live was the desire to save Padmé. When he was being transformed into a half-machine due to the extremely serious wounds, Padmé on another planet was delivering twins. However, while the desire to save Padmé made Vader survive, Padmé lost the will to live because her heart was broken by what Anakin had become. She died after telling Obi-wan, ―There…is good in him. I know there is… still…‖ (Episode III). In the dark surgery room, after Vader woke up, the first thing he asked was, ―Where is Padmé? Is she safe, is she all right?‖ But the devious Sidious told him, ―I‘m afraid she died. …it seems in your anger, you killed her.‖ The shock induced unbearable pain and anger in Vader. ―I couldn‘t have! She was alive! I felt her! It‘s impossible! No!!!‖ (Episode III)

That is a critical blow to Vader‘s heart. He promised he wouldn‘t fail again to protect the one he loved, but he still failed. He changed dramatically thereafter. He became a loyal apprentice to the Sith Lord, performing whatever ruthless tasks given to him without any conflicts in mind, even the task to kill his son. It was as if, there was no purpose for him to live; he lived only for living‘s sake. It can be interpreted that Vader went from freedom to bad faith. He no longer believed that he could create himself; rather, he believed that he had been made what he was, by everything and everyone surrounding him, and even by the Force ―before‖ he was born. This is his way to explain his failures and to evade his responsibility for them. It‘s like he was telling himself that, ―if I was not made, how come I couldn‘t achieve my purposes? How come I would fail twice?‖ The value of love died along with Padmé, and freedom was nothing to Vader when love didn‘t exist. The idea that everything was determined made him feel better. For Vader, to follow was more acceptable and easier than to create. Sartre would call Vader a coward since he hid from his total freedom. But it would be more suitable to say that Vader was a coward not just because he chose to hide from his freedom; it is also because he didn‘t know how to face his

failures.

However, he was given the third chance. The final battle between Vader and Luke came to an end with Vader‘s right machine-hand severed. Perhaps it is as Luke pointed out, upon seeing his own son, something lost began to surface in Vader‘s mind. ―Your thoughts betray you, father. I feel the good in you…the conflict. . . . You

couldn‘t bring yourself to kill me before, and I don‘t believe you‘ll destroy me now.‖ (Episode VI) Though denying that there were conflicts inside, Vader in fact didn‘t seem to exercise full strength to fight Luke. Yet, Luke was no opponent to Darth Sidious. The Sith Lord used his Force lightning, shocking Luke to the edge of death. Witnessing this, the long lost ―love‖ surged again in Vader. He had promised he would protect the one he loved. And it was the opportunity he had always wished he could grasp. He was only able to see the last breath fading away from his mother, and he didn‘t even have the chance to see his wife for the last time. Now it is his son who was dying in front of him, begging him for help. As if suddenly ―waking up,‖ Vader stepped forward, grabbed the lightning-unleashing Sith Lord, held him above his head, and hurled him into the reactor of the Death Star. Darth Sidious died in the explosion.

Suffering from the lightning, Vader didn‘t have many breathes left since the machine-parts on him were all destroyed. He whispered to Luke, asking him to remove his helmet.

LUKE: But you‘ll die.

VADER: Nothing can stop that now. Just for once…let me look at you with my own eyes.

. . .

ANAKIN: Now…go, my son. Leave me.

LUKE: No. You‘re coming with me. I can‘t leave you here. I‘ve got to save you.

ANAKIN: You already have, Luke. You were right about me. Tell your sister…you were right. (Episode VI)

What was Luke right about? He was right that there was good in his father; he believed so as firmly as his mother. Vader died, but he died as Anakin. Luke‘s believing in him and loving him aroused the long forgotten ―love,‖ the value Anakin once cherished so much and the value that made him human. With it Vader accepted his freedom one more time and made his last choice. This time he sacrificed no other, but himself. The success in saving the one he loved set Vader‘s heart at peace. Though he couldn‘t bring back the lives of his mother and his wife, he protected his son from death. And that was enough. It is the first time Anakin made a choice without

hesitation, and it is the first time that from the bottom of his heart, he knew it was the best choice. Anakin had his salvation, and the balance of the Force was restored unnoticeably.

The crucial choices of Anakin Skywalker show that, while Sartre‘s theory is sufficient to account for the ideal of freedom, as in the case of Orestes, it fails to capture other significant elements in life. From Anakin Skywalker, remorse for something one didn‘t do, remorse as a proof of responsibility, anguish from a difficult choice, a wrong choice out of free will, and the importance of values other than freedom are presented. Orestes exemplifies Sartre‘s idea of absolute freedom amply, and he is indeed an ideal free man. But we wouldn‘t consider Anakin Skywalker inferior to Orestes. In Orestes the promotion of freedom is the highest value; the moment he claimed ―I am my freedom‖ (117; emphasis original) in the face of Zeus, he became the ―embodiment of the ontological absolute freedom‖ (Daigle 53). He promoted not only his own freedom, but also that of others. On the other hand, in Anakin, freedom is not the major focus. Rather, the difficulty of choices, and where the different kinds of difficulty lie in are highlighted. Choices made out of conflicts

owing to various values one cherishes make clear that freedom is not the sole core value for human beings. Freedom‘s significance lies not in itself, but in the fact that it makes other values possible for each agent to choose. That Sartre gives particular attention to freedom is understandable and reasonable. After all, freedom is the

starting point. What the choices of Anakin Skywalker bring out are not the mistakes in his theory, but rather the points he intentionally or unintentionally leaves behind when promoting the absolute freedom of human beings.

However, there is an issue needed to be dealt with. Sartre seems to take human absolute free will for granted under the premise of the absence of God, but the God‘s non-existence alone cannot guarantee the existence of free will. The other threat comes from determinism. Although Sartre refutes determinism in his arguments as he refutes God, the fact is that determinism cannot be eradicated in this way. Whereas there is no solid proof that God exists, there is indeed evidence that determinism surrounds us. Therefore, the freedom of Anakin and Orestes, and the freedom of human beings, are not yet in their hands. Does free will exist? Can human beings be responsible for who they are and the choices they make if free will is just an illusion? The next chapter will devote to these questions concerning free will and determinism.