A little help for a non fanboy?

[Duke Bushido 1,402]

full disclosure:

 

Never have been a Star Wars fan.  Thought the very first one was fun, if extremely goofy, and like most people, was amazed at the effects (I'm old enough that I watched it in the theater as an adult; nothing I had ever seen before had effects like that).  In fact, I am such a not-fan that I thought "Rogue One" was quite possibly the best Star Wars movie ever made, and was the "prequel" that fans actually deserved, in as much as it was an actual prequel and was consistent to the first movie.

 

All that being said, I've got a question that was put into mind in the very first (or the second, maybe?) movie, and thirty five years of movies have _yet_ to answer.  I'm hoping maybe there are fans that can help me with this, as I'm not looking for speculation or fill-in-the-blank answers; those I can do for myself, but thank you just the same.  

 

Beyond "oh, he's the bad guy that gives orders to the dark-jedi-master-of-the-moment, what the _frack_ is a Sith?  Why is it never answered in the films?

 

It's not a race; they're all different physically.  There's never mention of a Sith home world.  There's a vague allusion that they are all-powerful, all-evil haters of life, but even that can't be true, since their primary goals seem to be empire building as opposed to wiping out all living things.  So, beyond "magic space europeans," what the frel are they?  What is a Sith?

 

 

Thank any knowledgeable responders for your time, and thank any hooligan responders for the humor  (just let me know which is which, please  )

 

 

[Ternaugh 1,699]

Originally, I think that Darth Vader's title of "Dark Lord of the Sith" was supposed to be a way of explaining why he was called Lord Vader, and probably echoes the various titles of Republic Serial villains in the past. The first movie didn't really have the various trappings of other movies, and in one notable scene, Obi Wan uses "Darth" as if it's not a title, but a first name.

 

Once the movies started rolling out, the background story changed to establish that the Sith were an order that used the Force, and were opposed to the Jedi's methods and philosophies. Sith used strong emotion to direct and amplify their powers, while Jedi stressed a lack of emotion and calm to focus theirs. Darth became a title to denote followers of the Sith doctrines, and then we got the "always two, there are" speech by Yoda in the prequels to establish that there's always a master and apprentice*.

 

 

 

*Though that seems doubtful, given how fast they get new apprentices.

[death tribble 3,434]

This is what wikipedia has to say about it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sith

But at its basic level, evil Jedi or the opposite of a Jedi

[GreaterThanOne 19]

The Sith were originally a race. They were defeated but their Philosophy became like a religion. So Sith were warrior monks based on might and power. The third "version" is a revival like The Third Reich or MAGA. 

[Duke Bushido 1,402]

Thanks, Tribble, but I was avoiding Wikipedia on this one because there was no doubt that it would draw on a hundred different sources (novels comics, cartoons and who-knows-what-else). 

 

As someone who has only seen the movies, I was hoping someone could clue me in from that perspective, but based on the wikipedia entry, I don't think it's possible to get it from the movies, since the movies seem to contradict what the article says.  😕

 

I mean, if the Darth - is- the be-all, end-all of evil sithiness , then who the hell is the guy pushing his buttons, and how is it necessary (or even possible!) to have someone in that position? 

[L. Marcus 2,109]

The Emperor was originally, as I understand it, supposed to be a milquetoast figurehead.

[Lord Liaden 4,882]

I'm not a fan either, Duke, but I do know there's a HUGE amount of lore surrounding the Star Wars universe, from movies, animated television series, books, comics, and video games. Much of it was considered "canon" per George Lucas, but not all of it. Even some of what is considered canon sometimes appears contradictory.

 

However, if you think of the Sith as "anti-Jedi," Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine as the last Sith, and their relationship being comparable to that of Luke and Obi-wan, that's close enough for government work.

[Cancer 5,759]

8 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

full disclosure:

 

Never have been a Star Wars fan.  Thought the very first one was fun, if extremely goofy, and like most people, was amazed at the effects (I'm old enough that I watched it in the theater as an adult; nothing I had ever seen before had effects like that).  In fact, I am such a not-fan that I thought "Rogue One" was quite possibly the best Star Wars movie ever made, and was the "prequel" that fans actually deserved, in as much as it was an actual prequel and was consistent to the first movie.

 

Only difference between you and me is that I had a couple of idle summers (the first movie came out near the end of my sophomore year of college) where I could dabble in the published backstory early on, so from that I picked up that Sith were anti-Jedis with a goofy org tree, and that's all you need, really.

 

Because I was more or less locked in an apartment for a month with The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings and no other reading material when I was 12, I read that cover-to-cover more times than I can count, and absorbed all that story down to all the dwarves' names that went to Erebor.  (And I won a trivia contest 12 years later,  to my embarrassment.)  But I haven't gone in to any fan story stuff since ... instead I used the capacity for all the junk you need to get into and through grad school instead.

[Duke Bushido 1,402]

Thanks to all of you; Lord Liaden and Cancer in particular.

 

I appreciate what you're saying, but it bugs me that after-- what?  ten movies?  I don't know; still not a fan.  But after all that time, the "Dark Lord of this Sith" has some other guy behind him pulling the strings, and nobody (the writers, I mean; not the fans or the fine folks who offered answers here) can sensibly explain this relationship.  (don't worry; this isn't the _only_ reason I'm not a fan)    Which one of these guys is in charge, and if "the other guys" are pulling the strings of the Sith Lords because they are so powerful, why do they even _need_ the Darths?  It's so senseless.

 

 

Bah-- It just bugs the Hell out of me.  :/

 

 

Thank you all.

 

 

I think I have what I need.

 

 

 

 

[L. Marcus 2,109]

Keeps 'em on their toes!

[dmjalund 961]

Lords are usually lower rank than Emperors (dark or not)

[Doc Democracy 1,320]

Duke

If you think of Palpatine's modus operandi, he worked behind the scenes, throwing shadows at his opponents.  It is possible Dark Lord of the Sith and even the idea of the Sith were made up by Palpatine to enhance the aura of fear

Surrounding his favourite strong man. 

 

Palpatine is a bad guy.  Bad guys don't follow the rules, not even the ones the good guys think are true. 

 

😬

 

Doc

[Bazza 3,755]

Sith: Jedi (space wizards) bad guys that use red coloured lightsabers. Other things from the movies is that they use negative emotions (vices) to power their abilities. 

[Duke Bushido 1,402]

1 hour ago, Bazza said:

they use   ....   (vices) to power their abilities. 

 

Dude, I'd be rockin' a laser Claymore if that's all it took.... 

[Bazza 3,755]

1 hour ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

Dude, I'd be rockin' a laser Claymore if that's all it took.... 

 

Use your hate, you know it to be true-ish. 

[IndianaJoe3 673]

Darth Vader's laundry is the dark load of the Sith.

[Ternaugh 1,699]

1 hour ago, IndianaJoe3 said:

Darth Vader's laundry is the dark load of the Sith.

 

Jedi scum staining your clothes? Try Order 66 Laundry Detergent! Guaranteed to virtually 'Wipe them all out!'