Skip to main content

Star Wars Proves Killing Qui-Gon Was Essential to the Sith's Success

Refusing to be blinded by Coruscant's politics, the Star Wars comic series Age of the Republic emphasizes how Qui-Gon Jinn represents the best of the Order. If there were more Jedi who followed his moral philosophy and acted as guardians of peace rather than warriors, it's clear the Sith's return under Emperor Palpatine would have been impossible.

In Star Wars: Age of Republic - Qui-Gon Jinn (2018) #1, Qui-Gon is on a planet called Br'in defending the Priestess of Wood from blaster fire. When surrounded, the priestess refers to Qui-Gon as a mighty "Jedi Warrior," which Qui-Gon corrects by saying he "was sent to find a peaceful solution" rather than fight. Upon their escape to Coruscant, Qui-Gon voices his inquisitive concerns about the Jedi's purpose to Grandmaster Yoda.

Related: Star Wars Hints How Sith Stayed Hidden In High Republic Era (But Kept Power)

When Qui-Gon speaks with Yoda, he says the Jedi "are seen as soldiers. Servants of politicians. With little mention of the Force itself." He explains, "Perhaps the Jedi Council residing in Coruscant is part of the problem. The Jedi are used as a weapon of the Republic and are seen as such. Perhaps even by Jedis themselves." He concludes his opinion by believing "there is a loss of vision." To find answers, Qui-Gon travels to a planet filled with greenery and receives a vision through the Force. Qui-Gon's understanding reveals itself when he proclaims, "violence sows the seeds of the dark side. Unchecked, the Jedi could become that which they fight against." The issue ends with Qui-Gon telling Yoda, "What is the Jedi's purpose if not balance?" The issue comes from Jody Houser and Cory Smith.

Qui-Gon's prophetic vision in Age of Republic and his discussions with Yoda emphasize how he is the best of the Jedi because he openly questions the Council's decisions and is open to unusual solutions to find balance (part of the reason why he wasn't on the Council). When Darth Maul killed Qui-Gon, he slew perhaps the most influential Jedi offering an alternative to the blinkered view with made the Order so vulnerable to Palpatine's machinations.

By referring to the Jedi as "soldiers" and "servants of politicians," Qui-Gon suggests that the Jedi are servicemen who perform duties for a foreign body, like the Republic, rather than focusing on their internal service to the galaxy for the Jedi Order. Furthermore, Qui-Gon mentions that the Council's location on Coruscant may be part of the issue because of their proximity to the Senate (which acted as the Sith's tool of manipulation), hence why he believes the Jedi have lost their way. When he concludes that the "Jedi could become that which they fight against" by becoming violent warriors, the comic implies how Qui-Gon's connection to the Force and desire for balance is why he sees the Jedi's corruption. Even when he tries to tell Yoda, who disagrees, Qui-Gon still believes the Jedi's purpose should be to find balance, but they can't because the Senate is influencing them (and, unbeknownst to him, the Senate is controlled by the Sith.)

Star Wars: Age of Republic - Qui-Gon Jinn (2018) #1 supports the notion that the Jedi are galactic failures because they were unaware of how strong the Republic's influence was on the Council. However, Qui-Gon's moral greyness and connection to the Force are what saved him from being blinded by corruption. Even though Qui-Gon was unaware that the Sith were gaining power and influence in the Senate, his keen awareness of the unfolding situation would have made him their worst nightmare. Star Wars shows how their success relied on the Jedi being unaware and rigidly set in their way, but had Qui-Gon Jinn survived, it's likely his direct action and counsel to Yoda would have stopped them walking into Palpatine's Sith trap.

Next: Star Wars Reveals Why Qui-Gon Jinn Wasn’t On The Council



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

CBS' Ghosts: Every Main Ghost Time Period & Backstory Explained

One of CBS' newest sitcoms,  Ghosts , features a cast full of spectral characters that each hail from a distinct time period and come with their own unique backstory and death. Though each of the eight ghosts has a wildly different perspective based on their different experiences throughout history, they nonetheless form a sort of family, which is one of the show's greatest charms. After all, being stuck with the same people for all of eternity allows for plenty of time to get to know each other. Ghosts , which is an adaptation of a BBC show of the same name, stars Utkarsh Ambudkar and Rose McIver (who played Liv Moore on five seasons of  iZombie ) as Jay and Sam, a young couple who inherit a mansion in upstate New York. To their surprise, however, the house also comes with several ghostly inhabitants, who Sam is able to see after a near-death experience. These are Thorfinn (Devan Long), Sasappis (Román Zaragoza), Isaac (Brandon Scott Jones), Hetty (Rebecca Wisocky...

The Hateful Eight's Original Ending Explained (& Why Tarantino Changed It)

The Hateful Eight has an ending full of blood and betrayal, as expected from any Quentin Tarantino movie, but this wasn’t the original ending – here’s why he changed it. Tarantino has explored different genres throughout his career; though he’s best known for his crime movies like Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction , he's also visited genres like martial arts (with both Kill Bill  films) and black comedy ( Once Upon a Time in Hollywood ). In addition, he's shared his version of westerns with Django Unchained and The Hateful Eight , with the latter going through some problems and creative changes even before it began shooting. Set in 1870, Tarantino's The  Hateful Eight follows eight strangers, all with different (and secret) motivations, who end up in a stagecoach lodge after seeking refuge from a blizzard. These characters are Major Marquis Warren (Samuel L. Jackson), John “The Hangman” Ruth (Kurt Russell), Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh), Chris Mannix (Walton Gog...

Why Spider-Man 3's Uncle Ben Retcon Doesn't Change Peter's Origin

Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man 3 is often criticized for a major retcon made to Uncle Ben’s death , but this retcon ultimately doesn’t change Peter Parker’s classic origin story. Raimi’s third film in the iconic Spider-Man trilogy is often criticized, perhaps unfairly. While the film suffers from too many character arcs and plot threads and would have been better as two or three separate films, it does a more than adequate job adapting the Spider-Man comics and telling a sincere story about relatable, flawed, characters who are intertwined with the extraordinary, just as Stan Lee and Steve Ditko intended when co-creating the character. Uncle Ben’s retconned death may alter classic elements from the comic version, but it retains its most important aspects in regards to Peter’s characterization. 2002’s Spider-Man is, for much of the film’s first half, a faithful adaptation of Spider-Man’s 1962 origin story in issue 15 of the Amazing Fantasy comics. An awkward social pariah, Pete...