I can't resist commenting on two lines people keep talking about in Episode III. If you want absolutely no spoilers, don't read this, but this spoils so little that most of you won't care. People have been complaining or rejoicing (depending on their view on the issue) at what they perceive to be Lucas' use of this film as a jab at Bush in the war on terrorism. I haven't seen it yet, but I did hear Lucas' response to these claims, and I know enough about the film and about the issues in question to say something, pending my viewing of the film of course for a final judgment. I'll keep the rest of this in the extended entry for those who are absolutists about spoilers, but this really won't spoil much of anything.
Eric Seymour registers the complaint well over at In the Agora. He cites the following exchange as an example of Lucas getting in a brief political jab at Bush:
Skywalker: You are either with me, or you are my enemy.
Kenobi: Only a Sith deals in absolutes.
First of all, this is one exchange in a whole film, and the overall storyline was around in the 70s, long before Bush was even on the radar as a possible politician. I doubt his father had even begun his first run for the presidency. That line is from Jesus, by the way. Bush didn't make it up. Jesus said the same thing 2000 years asgo about his followers, and Bush simply made the same claim about those who try to play both sides when it comes to terrorism. That merely helps them.
I don't know if Lucas wrote the line since Bush had adapted this saying, but he wrote the first draft this script in the 70s, and the major themes were all there. I believe him when he says that Bush had nothing to do with this film and that if any American president was the inspiration for the emperor it was the Nixon in the era of power-hungry politics. (Nixon's precessor was at best no better than Nixon; it's just that Nixon got caught. Lucas didn't say that, but it's important for me to point put that both parties put ruthless men in the White House in those days.)
The absolutes line is pretty cheesy, but a proper understanding of what it means philosophically (which I'm not sure if Lucas has) might make someone rethink what someone saying that has to mean by it. There's a difference between absolute moral principles and objective moral truth. Denying absolutes doesn't mean you deny objective morality. It just means you think that circumstances will affect whether a given principle applies. No principle applies absolutely in every situation. Killing, for instance, might be ok if done by a proper authority for the right reasons or if done in self-defense. So killing isn't absolutely immoral.
Denying absolutes is simply saying that morality is like that. It's not as radical as it sounds. Lucas may or may not be aware of this, so I don't know if it has any bearing on his own use of it, but it's a point I can't resist making because so many people get this wrong. I happen to think there are some moral absolutes, but I don't think Obi-Wan needs to be taking all that radical a view in saying this, whether Lucas realizes it or not. He may just mean that in the situation at hand (whatever it is; I haven't seen it yet) the moral choices may be complex, and you can stand for something Anakin wants without abandoning something he's opposing.