60

I had always assumed the Jedi in the title of Return of the Jedi referred to Luke Skywalker's return from defeat. But Jedi is its own plural -- could it be referring to the rebuilding of the organization/movement/religion that presumably occurs after the Empire is defeated? Or maybe even to the return of Anakin's good side?

Yes, the title was originally Revenge of the Jedi, but that doesn't make it much clearer. It could still be either Luke's revenge, or the Jedi's revenge over the Sith, or even something else.

Did Lucas ever say exactly what it was he intended?

  • 11
    Perhaps he meant all 3... – ElendilTheTall Jul 24 '14 at 10:38
  • 17
    The German title is "Die Rückkehr der Jedi-Ritter", literall translation, "The return of the jedi knights" - plural. However, I don't want to claim that this can not be a mistranslation. – Philipp Jul 24 '14 at 11:00
  • 7
    I always thought of is as an uncountable noun, meaning the return all the JEDI. – TecBrat Jul 24 '14 at 17:33
  • 7
    I'm with @ElendilTheTall. There's nothing wrong with a title that evokes several meanings and is intended to stand for all of them. That kind of title is rather clever, in my opinion. – jpmc26 Jul 24 '14 at 22:58
  • 4
    Just to add, in Italian it's "Il ritorno dello Jedi" where "dello" means one Jedi ("degli" would be the plural), and in my opinion it clearly refers to Luke, which was a normal person in the second movie and comes back as a Jedi in the third one. – Tallmaris Jul 25 '14 at 11:03
101

Luke: I am a Jedi, like my father before me.
Palpatine: [angrily] So be it... Jedi!

This is the crucial moment when Luke fully claims his heritage and asserts his Jedihood.

Before that, Jedi didn't exist anymore. The few remaining after Order 66 were in hiding or had died since (Obi-Wan Kenobi, Yoda).
But with Luke's claim, and through his and his father's actions, the Jedi as a concept, as a factor of importance in the world, has returned. Comparable with "Return of the Light".

So it's not the return of a specific Jedi (Luke or Anakin), it's not the return of a number of Jedi, but it's the return of the concept, the role of a Jedi.

The caption of the picture in the official Luke Skywalker bio on Starwars.com, showing Luke with his friends the Battle of Endor, underlines this:

Returning to his friends, Luke saw a trio of Force spirits -- Obi-Wan, Yoda and Anakin, redeemed by his sacrifice. Luke's love for his father had saved the galaxy, and brought about a chance to restore the Republic and the Jedi Order.

42

According to the official Starwars.com biography of Luke Skywalker, the film "Return of the Jedi" ends with the return of Anakin Skywalker.

It follows that the 'Jedi' mentioned in the title is Anakin rather than Luke or "The Jedi Order".

enter image description here

  • 20
    Yes, for better or worse - this is how I've always seen it. At the end of the film there are two "true" Jedi - Luke and Anakin. And its that moment that allows Luke to restart the Jedi Order, etc. However, I've also always hated the "redemption" of Vader. The guy is basically Hitler of the Star Wars universe and is "redeemed" because he decided he didn't want to sentence his son to death. Lucas has a very flexible concept of redemption. – joshbirk Jul 24 '14 at 16:51
  • 1
    I believe this is the correct answer. While SQB's answer is not wrong, it is the redemption of Vader that is the most (imo) significant "return" of Jedi within the story arc. – Beofett Jul 24 '14 at 18:53
  • 6
    @Beofett - Lucas has made it clear that he sees the two trilogies as "the story of Anakin" with various other characters involved. – Valorum Jul 24 '14 at 18:59
  • 22
    @Richard Too bad Lucas has been turned to the Dark Side, and can no longer be trusted.... – Beofett Jul 24 '14 at 19:00
  • 21
    "I have altered the movie, pray I don't alter it any further" -George Lucas to Star Wars fans – Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen Jul 26 '14 at 0:08
9

I thought about that too, a long time ago in a town far away.

The title Return of the Jedi simply means the destruction of the Sith and the return of the Jedi Order.

However, who knew Lucas at that time was to continue the Saga and subsequently stories and Paths change, so the title may be null if we find soon enough in part 7 that the Sith are lurking somewhere in the Galaxy.

  • 9
    You don't need the Sith to be destroyed for the title to have this meaning (which it always has for me). As long as there now Jedi again. – George T Jul 24 '14 at 11:56
  • 1
    But Luke was a Jedi, "I am a Jedi like my Father before me". if your talking about his dad making up the numbers well he returned to being a Jedi for 10 minutes. – Tasos Jul 24 '14 at 12:22
  • Do you have anything to go on other than speculation? – Plutor Jul 24 '14 at 12:44
  • Yea i spoke to George Lucas Just now and confirmed my answer. :)) jokes aside its not speculation, i read that (what i said) in a old 80's Staburst magazine in an Interview. I'm actually looking through them now but the only one i found is the Special Issue on Star Wars Vol 4 Number 7. – Tasos Jul 24 '14 at 13:02
  • On page 6 its says "Editors note: the rumor about the title change a couple of months ago. Naturally we checked the information with the London Lucasfilm office. It was the first they heard of it too. We thought no more of it. Now in the American film magazines we see the film still being referred to (Return). We still unclear about what the title will be. but usually no smoke without etc." – Tasos Jul 24 '14 at 13:02
4

According to the epilogue of the now-noncanonical book The Rise and Fall of Darth Vader, the title refers - at least in part - to Anakin Skywalker.

Night had fallen by the time Luke placed Anakin Skywalker's armor-clad body atop a pile of gathered wood. As he ignited the pyre, Luke said, "I burn his armor and with it the name of Darth Vader. May the name of Anakin Skywalker be a light that guides the Jedi for generations to come."

Luke was unaware of the spirits who watched him from the shadows of the lambent woods. But later, when he rejoined his allies for their victory celebration in the treetop village that was home to the Ewoks, Luke saw three shimmering apparitions materialize in the darkness. They were Obi-Wan Kenobi, Yoda... and his father, Anakin Skywalker.

The Jedi had returned.

  • I would read "Jedi" as plural there, actually. – SQB Jul 31 '18 at 19:54
3

Late answer to this thread, but I just came across Star Wars Trilogy: The Original Soundtrack Anthology box set which was released in 1993; meaning it is pre-“Special Edition” so some of the track titles and names allude to a universe that was not fully “expanded” in the post 1997 world.

enter image description here

Specific to this question, on disc 3—which contains tracks from Return of the Jedi—track 5 on that disc is actually named “Return of the Jedi” which is basically the musical cues specific to the scene in the film where Luke is about to “walk the plank” into the Sarlacc pit and then pulls a fast one—with the aid of R2-D2—and does some force-related moves including fending off Jabba’s flunkies with his lightsaber.

Which is all to say that at least at the time the film titled Return of the Jedi was released in 1983, the “Jedi” that had “returned” was embodied by Luke.

In The Empire Strikes Back (1980) he was “Not a Jedi yet…” and loses his hand—and almost loses his life—because of it. And at the beginning of the film Return of the Jedi, Luke has a new lightsaber and knows how to use it. In fact that rescue from Jabba the Hutt was the very first time anyone actually saw a Jedi do anything heroic in the classic, swashbuckling “I’m saving someone’s life…” sense and not in the sense of having endless duels with Darths and other members of the Sith.

So if you ask me, Luke’s training to become a Jedi was solid at the beginning of Return of the Jedi, but the ending was his true test… It’s not like—if in some parallel universe this happened—that Luke might have been turned to the dark side and was never a Jedi to begin with. Nope. He was a Jedi at the beginning of the film, but his confrontation with Vader and the Emperor at the end only reinforced it.

The cover to the “Star Wars Trilogy: The Original Soundtrack Anthology” box set.

  • 1
    Who gets to pick the track titles, though? John Williams? Some random producer from the publishing label? Why does their opinion count? – The Dark Lord Sep 2 '17 at 9:34
  • 1
    @TheDarkLord It counts because it exists as stated before the “Special Editions” happened. The subtle differences pre/post 1997 count. – JakeGould Sep 2 '17 at 20:00
  • While I don't really agree with this answer (I'm torn between the Jedi order and Anakin), I think it's still a nice catch. You have my +1. – Fabio Turati Jan 2 '18 at 22:14
2

Return of the Jedi refers to the return of Anakin Skywalker as previously stated above. This answer is to add up to Richard's answer. By using the term THE Jedi tries to focus on a specific Jedi Master (similar to THE ONE, or THE BEST or something like that). It a slur/slang in English and as we all know using it helps defining someone as the best in their field. "He is not a farmer, he is THE farmer".

So using the term THE instead of A in the title refers to THE Jedi which in fact is indeed Anakin Skywalker. The person who was born of a virgin mother, born directly from the force itself. He is THE JEDI.

Along with Richards answer that also explains on how Anakin returned in the movie this are what I believe the intentions of the title

  • 1
    Nothing in the title "Return of the Jedi" requires that the the function like a signifier emphasizing a certain Jedi. It could be referring to a single Jedi, or to a group of Jedi, or to the Jedi as a singular order. The title is ambiguous about the number of Jedi because the plural of Jedi is Jedi. Also it's neither a slur nor slang. – Mr. Shiny and New 安宇 Oct 12 '17 at 13:42
1

Return of the Jedi, not a Jedi.

For words where the plural and singular are the same, you should use "the" to refer to the group, and "a" to refer to the singular.

"The migration of the salmon" refers to all the Salmon migrating, not one.

It's the Return of the Jedi, as an organization.

  • 13
    "The" is used in both singular and plural cases. "The girl," "the man," "the cookie," for singular examples. In your salmon example, salmon could be singular or plural; we'd need more context to know which it referred to. So I don't think your grammatical argument holds up. The distinction between "the" and "a" is that between definite and indefinite articles. "The" refers to a specific instance of the noun it acts on, while "a" means any single unspecified instance of the noun. – jpmc26 Jul 26 '14 at 3:47
  • 1
    'The little sheep moved swiftly downhill.' In this statement, how many sheep moved downhill? – Pharap Jul 27 '14 at 4:11
-2

I really think Return of the Jedi was about Anakin, when he yelled no I think his no was being converted to the dark side. Not converting Luke to it either.

  • Which is what Valorum said in his answer, have you got more references to support this? Otherwise, this can be considered to be a comment. – Möoz Aug 1 '17 at 0:55

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.