Transparent LED Screen transforming windows or glass into a dynamic video screen.

"the jedi don't have therapists-"

jedi philosophy, and in particular the practices and teachings that jedi were expected to implement in their everyday lives, was therapy. dialectical behavior therapy (dbt), to be exact. anyone who's familiar with dbt knows where i'm already going with this, but like genuinely look up the basic tenets of dbt and it's identical with what the jedi were doing.

dbt, to put it simply, is a specific therapy technique that was designed for ptsd and past trauma. it's pretty different from traditional talk therapy. it combines a few different environments (individual, group, etc.), recognizing that no single format of treatment can stand alone.

the key focuses of dbt include:

emotional regulation- understanding, being more aware of, and having more control over your emotions

mindfulness- regulating attention and avoiding anxious fixation on the past or future

interpersonal effectiveness- navigating interpersonal situations

distress tolerance- tolerating distress and crises without spiraling and catastrophizing

i'm sure it's already clear from that list alone how much the jedi teachings correspond with the goals of dbt. the jedi value, teach, and practice the following:

identifying and understanding emotions

mindfulness and living in the present

compassion, diplomacy, and conflict resolution (on interpersonal scales, not just planetary or galactic)

accepting and tolerating certain levels of distress or discomfort (particularly mental, such as discomfort at the thought of losing a loved one to death)

idk man seems almost as if jedi mental health practices and dbt are two sides of a completely identical coin. (fun fact: both star wars and dbt are products of the 70s.)

and guess what? dbt was specifically designed as a treatment for borderline personality disorder. remember that one? or, if you don't, maybe you remember a specific character, the one who was literally used as an example by my professor in my undergrad psych class when she was teaching us about bpd?

tldr: simply existing within the jedi community, practicing jedi teachings, surrounded by a support network of other jedi of all life stages, was the therapy for anakin. even when viewed through a modern lens. it was even, more specifically, the precise type of therapy that has developed in modern times to treat the exact types of mental issues he was struggling with.

I killed a part of me to keep you alive.

And u never noticed

One thing that was really good about episode 4 of Ahsoka is that it knew exactly what the theme needed to be, the same thing that it always comes back to in Star Wars: Attachment. Ahsoka starts the episode off by saying that, if they can't get to the map, they may need to destroy it, stranding Ezra, because letting Thrawn come back is worse, knowing what would happen. Sabine's big temptation in this episode is exactly that--Baylan promises her that she can see Ezra again, because she thinks he's the only family he has left that she can do anything for, because she's so afraid to live without something that she makes a deal with the dark side. It's the exact same situation that Ezra had to make at the end of Rebels--he could bring Kanan back, but it would mean destroying all that Kanan saved in that moment, possibly even tear open time itself. He could have brought his parents back, but it would have let Sidious into the World Between Worlds to tear everything down. Which was the exact same situation that Anakin faced, that Ezra's was a riff off Anakin's, the willingness to trade the entire galaxy's freedom and lives for the one person (who wasn't even actually dead, either!) he was too afraid to live without. Which was the exact same situation that Luke faced, that he could save his friends if he would just give in to the dark side. It's the recurring theme of Star Wars, to face what attachment means to the Jedi, who are based on Buddhist monks, that attachment means the fear that makes you cling to someone or something so hard that you only end up hurting yourself--and Sabine, in her Jedi training, has to face this choice and she couldn't do it, she couldn't be selfless enough to let go and we can see it's going to be a shitshow. It's such a human, empathizable choice, she lost so much, her family is dead, she thinks Ahsoka is dead, she's been stagnating since Ezra left, she feels lost and adrift, of course she makes the wrong choice, of course she gives in to the fear that is attachment, and of course it's going to be awful. OUR GIRL IS GOING THROUGH IT, PLEASE BE KIND TO HER!!!!

What pisses me off sometimes is that many of the people in this fandom already understand attachment but just choose to not use that understanding for the Jedi.

Like. If you weren’t completely confused by Shuri’s arc in the new Black Panther you understand attachment.

If you understood why elenore let chidi leave in the finale of the good place, you understand attachment.

In fact I can think of like eight super hero movies where attachment (and learning to let go of it) is the KEY conflict.

Attachment is not a hard concept to grasp at all. “Letting go” is NEVER portrayed as a bad thing in media. Like. Never. Especially when it’s about letting go of a loved one who died instead of getting revenge.

When people watch a super hero movie and the super hero starts acting like a villain and a side character goes “you’ve got to let her go” I never find paragraphs on tumblr about how the hero should have kept acting like a villain and that side character was the real bad guy.

It’s just that the Jedi don’t struggle with it. The Jedi already practice attachment. They’re already at peace. And since Anakin has been a Jedi for so long and has given no real indication of struggling (I mean they don’t know about his secret wife), they just tell him to practice attachment and think that’s enough. Bc he should already know.

And when people say they shouldn’t have expected this of Anakin bc he wasn’t raised a Jedi… the Jedi are not the only ones who don’t act on attachment. The first person to explain attachment in the movies is Shimi Skywalker. She lets Anakin go and live a better life bc she is not attached to him. She tells him to not look back. This is the woman who raised Anakin. He was raised in a no-attachment household. He has no excuse. He was always taught about attachment. He knew what he was doing was wrong. He did it anyway.

Anakin was not confused by attachment. And neither is the audience really. There are so many stories about how attachment is bad, Lucas just calls it by its name. People choose not to like the Jedi bc they don’t find them interesting. Which is fine I suppose, but if you don’t like the Jedi bc the sith aesthetic is more your speed, just say that. Stop pretending you don’t understand a very common moral conflict.

All happiness or unhappiness solely depends upon the quality of the object to which we are attached by love.

Baruch Spinoza, On the Improvement of the Understanding

Mikel Jollett, Hollywood Park

It’s strange, I felt less lonely when I didn’t know you.

even when i'm away, all i think about is you. i can't fucking get away. you're in my head like a parasite, and i can't deny that i like it, but it drives me fucking insane. i'm so fucking attached to you. i don't know what to do.

pro tip: when writing about star wars, simply don't tack on a line about attachment. it's not necessary. i promise you can talk about jedi loving each other without bringing up attachment

autism things 183

feeling more connections to objects instead of people (plushies, toys, dolls, clothes, accessories, fidgets, blankets, household items, etc)

attachment

anne sexton, herman hesse (tr. damion searls), lancelot-graal (c. 1450—55), margaret atwood, thien-di do, huw lemmey, possession, will storr

People be like "Star Wars has never had mental health in it lol" as if the Jedi are not literally telling the main character to be mindful or teaching him about non-attachment and letting go of his fears. The Jedi have ALWAYS been preaching mental health, from 1977, you just missed it.

What are the attachment rules in the High Republic Jedi are like?

The High Republic Jedi and the prequels Jedi are pretty much exactly the same on this front--attachment is specifically the fear that keeps you holding onto something/someone to possess it/them because you're afraid to live without them, that you would sacrifice a thousand lives to save just the one because your fear is greater than your compassion. Because the Force works based on your emotions--what you put into it is what you get out of it--you cannot connect to the Force through fear and anger (ie, attachment, as more closely aligned with the Buddhist definition, because Jedi are strongly influenced by Buddhism more than anything else), because that's a path to the dark side. GEORGE LUCAS & ATTACHMENT:

“[Jedi Knights] do not grow attachments, because attachment is a path to the dark side. You can love people, but you can’t want to possess them. They’re not yours. Accept that they have a fate. Even those you love most are going to die. You can’t do anything about that. Protect them with your lightsaber, but if they die they were going to die. there’s nothing you can do. All you can do is accept that fact.     “In mythology, if you go to Hades to get them back you’re not doing it for them, you’re doing it for yourself. You’re doing it because you don’t want to give them up. You’re afraid to be without them. The key to the dark side is fear. You must be clean of fear, and fear of loss is the greatest fear. If you’re set up for fear of loss, you will do anything to keep that loss from happening, and you’re going to end up in the dark side. That’s the basic premise of Star Wars and the Jedi, and how it works.     “That’s why they’re taken at a young age to be trained. They cannot get themselves killed trying to save their best buddy when it’s a hopeless exercise.” --George Lucas, The Star Wars Archives: 1999-2005

 “In this film, (The Phantom Menace) you begin to see that he has a fear of losing things, a fear of losing his mother, and as a result, he wants to begin to control things, he wants to become powerful, and these are not Jedi traits. And part of these are because he was starting to be trained so late in life, that he’d already formed these attachments. And for a Jedi, attachment is forbidden.” --George Lucas to CNN, May 8, 2002

    “The fact that everything must change and that things come and go through his life and that he can’t hold onto things, which is a basic Jedi philosophy that he isn’t willing to accept emotionally and the reason that is because he was raised by his mother rather than the Jedi. If he’d have been taken in his first year and started to study to be a Jedi, he wouldn’t have this particular connection as strong as it is and he’d have been trained to love people but not to become attached to them.

    “But he has become attached to his mother and he will become attached to Padme and these things are, for a Jedi, who needs to have a clear mind and not be influenced by threats to their attachments, a dangerous situation. And it feeds into fear of losing things, which feeds into greed, wanting to keep things, wanting to keep his possessions and things that he should be letting go of. His fear of losing her turns to anger at losing her, which ultimately turns to revenge in wiping out the village. The scene with the Tusken Raiders is the first scene that ultimately takes him on the road to the dark side. I mean he’s been prepping for this, but that’s the one where he’s sort of doing something that is completely inappropriate.“ --George Lucas, Attack of the Clones commentary

PREQUELS JEDI & ATTACHMENT:

THE HIGH REPUBLIC JEDI & ATTACHMENT:

     "I'm like...just a big huge ball of attachments!" she moaned. "I'm attached to being alive! And to my friends being alive, too! And to Master Sy! Every day I go somewhere new in this galaxy and feel attached to it, meet more wonderful people that I don't want to be hurt or killed! The attachments just keep coming! If I live to grow old, I'll have thousands and thousands of them! I'm even attached to the Star Hopper, and that's just a silly ship! Ugh!" [....]      “Let me ask you this: If saving Master Sy or Zeen meant that you’d never see them again but you’d have the knowledge that they’d be safe, would you still do it?” [....]      “I would.”      “Then you are saving them for them, Padawan, not for yourself.  It is not attachment.” --Vernestra Rwoh and Lula Talisola, [Star Wars: Race to Crashpoint Tower]

     But Jedi weren't supposed to have attachments, even to the past, even to a simpler, safer life. If this was the time she'd been born into, she would face it with everything she had. It was the only choice. --Lula Talisola, Race to Crashpoint Tower

     Lula knew she wasn't supposed to form attachments, and she understood why—she could feel it jangling up her flow, twisting her connection to the Force into unintelligible knots. But what else was she supposed to do? She cared about her friends and didn't want them to get hurt. --Lula Talisola, [Star Wars: Race to Crashpoint Tower]

      [Ram had] been in his first real fight! He'd lived! And so had everyone else! Which was a huge relief, really. The idea of taking a life, even in battle, was almost as scary to him as the thought of losing his own. He hoped he'd never have to do it, and then, as he'd been trained to do, he did his best to release any attachment to outcomes and just exist in the gigantic spinning galaxy. --Ram Jomaram [Star Wars: Race to Crashpoint Tower]

     How many times had Lula ignited her saber to save her own life or those of her loved ones in just the past few months? She'd lost track.      But Jedi weren't supposed to have attachments, even to the past, even to a simpler, safer life. If this was the time she'd been born into, she would face it with everything she had. It was the only choice. --Lula Talisola [Star Wars: Race to Crashpoint Tower]

  “So, the Jedi are Force users united in our quest to understand the mysteries of the Force and to serve as guardians of peace and justice throughout the galaxy. [....] we ground ourselves in a spiritual existence and give up individual attachments in order to focus entirely on greater concerns." --Reath Silas [Star Wars: The High Republic: Into the Dark]

All of this forms a consistent definition and pattern and set of rules--the prequels Jedi and the High Republic Jedi both are more along the lines of attachment in the Buddhist sense and it's dangerous because of how the Force works, because as the Jedi define it, it's inseparable from anger and fear. Of course there's room for Jedi to question how they approach those same rules and what it means to them individually, just as Lula questions it, so does Ahsoka, and this is shown to be a natural part of the process of learning to be a Jedi, but ultimately both the prequels and the High Republic have the same rule for the same reason--attachment is forbidden because the worldbuilding says it's a path to the dark side and the dark side will fuck you up.

There is no soul so vile, no heart so barbarous, that it is not susceptible of some kind of attachment.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Confessions