Anakin

Communication, Culture & Critique ISSN 1753-9129
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Darth Vader Made Me Do It! Anakin

Skywalkers Avoidance of Responsibility
and the Gray Areas of Hegemonic
Masculinity in the Star Wars Universe
Joshua Atkinson1 & Bernadette Calafell2
1 School of Communication Studies, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH 43403
2 Department of Human Communication Studies, University of Denver, Denver, CO 80208
In this essay, we examined the interactions of Anakin Skywalker during moral dilemmas in the Star Wars narrative in order to demonstrate the avoidance of responsibility
as a characteristic of hegemonic masculinity. Past research on sexual harassment
has demonstrated a gray area that shields sexual harassers from responsibility. We
explored how such a gray area functions as a characteristic of hegemonic masculinity
by shielding one male, Anakin Skywalker, from responsibility for his immoral and often
violent actions. Through our investigation, we found three themes integral for the construction of a gray area that helped Anakin avoid responsibility: phantom altruism,
a clone-like will, and the guise of the Sith.
doi:10.1111/j.1753-9137.2008.01026.x
Luke: Youre coming with me. I cant leave you here. Ive got to save you.
Anakin: You already have, Luke. You were right about me. Tell your sister, you
were right.
Dialogue between Anakin Skywalker (also known as Darth Vader) and his son
Luke in Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi.
Within the field of communication, examinations of mediated examples of
hegemonic masculinity have become increasingly popular (e.g., Ashcraft & Flores,
2003; Battles & Hilton-Morrow, 2002; Connell, 1987; Hanke, 1990, 1998; Miller,
2001; Nakayama, 1994; Palmer-Mehta, 2006, Vavrus, 2002). In his landmark essay
Hegemonic Masculinity on the Mound: Media Representations of Nolan Ryan and
American Sports Culture, Trujillo (1991) describes hegemonic masculinity as a cultural or idealized masculinity that filters itself into the common sense of a society.
Trujillo further names five features of hegemonic masculinity: (a) physical force and
Corresponding author: Bernadette Calafell; e-mail: Bernadette.Calafell@du.edu
Communication, Culture & Critique 2 (2009) 120 2009 International Communication Association
Darth Vader Made Me Do It!
J. Atkinson & B. Calafell
control, (b) occupational achievement, (c) familial patriarchy, (d) frontiersmanship,

and (e) heterosexuality. Shortly after both authors had viewed Star Wars Episode III:
Revenge of the Sith (Lucas, 2005), we realized that Anakin Skywalker, who would
ultimately become the villainous Darth Vader, exhibited each of the five characteristics of hegemonic masculinity described by Trujillo. Anakin/Vader exerted physical
force and control via his body and metaphysical use of the Force throughout all six of
the movies. He attained great achievements as a Jedi in the prequel movies and as an
agent of the Empire in the original trilogy. He exhibited familial patriarchy as he
fought to protect his wife and unborn children in the prequels and sacrificed his life
to save his son in Episode VI: Return of the Jedi (Lucas & Kershner, 1983). Anakins
character and actions could be compared to the frontiersmanship aspect of hegemonic masculinity in that he is a white male with working class values who
embodies that shoot em up Western mentality (Trujillo, 1991, p. 291). Finally,
Anakin breaks his Jedi vow of celibacy to fulfill compulsory heterosexuality with
Padme Amidala, with whom he had been obsessed with since childhood.
In addition to the five characteristics of hegemonic masculinity that we observed
from Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader, we also noted something quite integral to the
character. It seemed as if Anakin/Vader was devoid of responsibility for his actions
throughout the prequel trilogy and the entire Star Wars saga. There was never
a moment prior to his transformation into the villainous Darth Vader where he
faced a choice between a path of good and a path of evil and made a resolute choice
to follow the path of evil. Instead, the prequel movies were more about excuses for
Anakins transformation into the murderous Darth Vader than about morality and
ethical choices (see Dees, 2005). These observations seem to stand in stark contrast to
the end of the finale of the saga in Episode VI: Return of the Jedi, when Luke pled with
his father to turn away from the dark side of the Force, which Anakin/Vader did as he
killed the Emperor and saved Lukes life. Anakin/Vader had been saved by Luke and
ultimately forgiven for his villainous transgressions. Yet, how can one make amends
for crimes and wrongsand ultimately be forgivenif one never takes responsibility
for ones actions but rather turns to excuses for those actions? What is particularly
troubling is the notion that two generations of audiences seem to be less satisfied
with the annoying antics of the Ewoks or the hammy and poorly animated appearance of Jar-Jar Binks than they are with the glaring problem of Anakin Skywalker
avoiding responsibility for his brutal crimes against humanity yet finding salvation at
the end of the narrative. In this essay, we explore the Star Wars films from a perspective grounded in the narrative paradigm in order to demonstrate that Anakin
Skywalkers avoidance of responsibility for his actions throughout the saga constitutes a sixth characteristic of hegemonic masculinity as initially theorized by Trujillo
(1991). This avoidance of responsibility, through what has been termed the gray area,
allows Anakin Skywalker to commit countless atrocities while walking away
unscathed and in the end redeemed. Below, we briefly examine existing work on
hegemonic masculinity, the gray area, and narrative criticism. Following this, we
examine how this avoidance of responsibility happens in the Star Wars saga through
2
three themes and finally conclude with the relevance of this characteristic beyond
this text.
Hegemonic masculinity, the gray area, and Star Wars
Star Wars has not been without criticism for its potentially racist and sexist depictions, which further cement the character of Anakin Skywalker as the embodiment
of hegemonic masculinity, a placement connected to Whiteness.1 Our research
acknowledges past work that theorizes hegemonic masculinity as grounded in
a hypermasculine ideal that emphasizes dominance, toughness, and violence as
forms of power (e.g., Connell, 1987; Miller, 2001), as well as past work that emphasizes the simultaneous role of race, gender, and sexuality in the construction of
hegemonic masculinity (Nakayama, 1994). As Nakayama argues, White masculinity
as it intersects with patriarchy, dominance, and power is constructed as normative,
thus making it hegemonic, as all other masculinities are measured against or in
relation to it. Furthermore, DeFrancisco and Palczewski (2007) contend that hegemonic masculinity: Does not require all men to engage in overt toxic practices, but
it does encourage men to remain silent to protect their own masculinity when others
commit such practices (p. 147). In addition to recentering Whiteness, we acknowledge that hegemonic masculinity domesticates feminist critiques of masculinity
(Vavrus, 2002). Such domestication includes the assimilation of oppositional
ideologies concerning masculinity and reinscribing those ideologies with more
traditional notions of manliness (e.g., Vavrus, 2002), as well as the comedic
mock-macho that reiterates masculine dominance in public and private space
through jokes about characteristics of hegemonic masculinity that conceal hostility
toward women and feminist critiques (e.g., Hanke, 1998). Thus, our purpose in this
essay was not simply to write about Star Wars and Anakin Skywalker; rather, we are
concerned with mapping the shifting terrains of public representations of hegemonic
masculinity, especially as they create a gray area that allows for sexist and predatory
behavior.
One cannot deny the influence of Star Wars on popular culture for the past 30
years. As Ott and Aoki (2004) argue, films have the power to frame the way we view
ourselves, our relation to others, and the social world (p. 151). As we will argue,
narrative in the film functions to educate audiences about hegemonic masculinity
and its shifting contours. Star Wars has reached multiple generations and countless
audiences and is likely one of the most parodied and mimicked films of all time.
Thus, it continues to be re-presented or alluded to in ways that further cement or
magnify its importance as a cultural artifact. This influence coupled with the lessons
it provides about masculinity and femininity and good and evil, all within a traditional mythic format, makes Star Wars a text ripe for interpretation.
Integral to our investigation of the Star Wars saga and Anakin Skywalkers
avoidance of responsibility is the concept of gray area. Past research in organizational communication has discussed the gray area as the nebulous and confusing
space where responsibility for inappropriate actions becomes tangled and lost. We
see this gray area as a concept that can be transferred to the study of rhetoric and
narratives, such as the critical cultural research of Ott and Aoki (2004) and Trujillo
(1991). In fact, we see the gray area as a key component of hegemonic masculinity
associated with Anakin Skywalker. Furthermore, we argue that this gray area has not
been explicitly examined within discussions of hegemonic masculinity and that a text
like Star Wars demonstrates the potency of this nexus. It is through gray areas that
oppressive practices such as exploitation and sexual harassment are most dangerous
and most invisible. Dougherty and Atkinson (2006) alluded to the concept of the
gray area as they examined the stories woven by a sexual harasser named Jim:
Jims sexualized language was always produced in hypothetical terms, placing
his behavior in the gray area of sexual harassment. By this [we] mean that it was
fully deniable. Had [Dougherty] confronted him, he could reasonably apologize
for the simple understanding. (p. 303)
Many organizational communication scholars find that in the case of sexual harassment, there are sharp divisions between men and women about what constitutes
a harassing act (Berryman-Fink & Riley, 1997; Booth-Butterfield, 1989; Garlick,
1994; Hemphill & Pfeiffer, 1986; Mongeau & Blalock, 1994; Thacker & Gohmann,
1993). According to Dougherty and Atkinson (2006), it is such a cloud of confusion
that allows for the rise of a gray area, where a sexual harasser can employ strategies
like the use of hypothetical terms to sexualize interactions while at the same time
shield himself from responsibility for the inappropriate behavior. Ultimately, the
gray area was a place where Jim, a known sexual harasser, could dispute his actions
within the workplace and plead ignorance or innocence; the gray area provided him
with a shield and an excuse. It is such a gray area that we see as important to Anakin
Skywalkers avoidance of responsibility for the murders and atrocities that he commits throughout the narrative of Star Wars. We also see this gray area and the
avoidance of responsibility as an important component to hegemonic masculinity
prevalent in contemporary culture, hence explaining audiences acceptance of
Anakin Skywalkers redemption in the very end.
Our analysis focused on hegemonic masculinity and gray areas in the Star Wars
saga created by George Lucas, which comprised six movies. The original episodes
(IVVI) were produced between 1977 and 1983 and detail the adventures of Luke
Skywalker and his companions as they fight with the rebellion against the Galactic
Empire. Central to the story is Lukes discovery that the evil Darth Vader is in fact his
father, Anakin Skywalker. Luke seeks to save his father from the clutches of the
Emperor, and in the final movie, Vader dies as he kills the Emperor in order to save
his son. The prequel episodes (IIII) were produced between 1999 and 2005 and
detail the life of young Anakin Skywalker and his transformation into Darth Vader.
Central to Anakins transformation is Palpatine, a Senator of the Old Republic who is
an evil Sith Lord (sworn enemies of the Jedi Knights) and becomes the Emperor of
the original episodes. In these prequel episodes, Palpatine rises to become the
Supreme Chancellor of the Republic and tempts Anakin to the cause of the Sith.
4
Our exploration of the Star Wars saga was grounded within the narrative paradigm developed by Fisher (1984, 1987), a perspective that contends homo narrans
(i.e., humans) construct their community and social world through narratives that
are told and retold. McGee (1990) built on the concept of narrative paradigm by
explaining that the different narratives that are told and retold throughout a society
constitute fragments that can coalesce to form overarching narratives that dictate
assumptions about a particular topic. Such overarching narratives hold what
Chatman (1990) termed ideological rhetorical force, which shapes the cultural
values and identity of audiences (Carr, 1986; White, 1984). Lucaites and Condit
(1985) argue that one of the functions of narrative is to instruct. We are particularly
interested in the instructive function of narrative fragments. For instance, through an
analysis of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, Ehrenhaus (1993) was able to demonstrate how narrative fragments in the news and popular media about veterans of the
Vietnam War coalesced in American society to blend into an overarching narrative
that defined the veteran as wounded. Similarly, scholars in rhetoric have taken this
approach to the study of film to understand how narrative fragments rather than film
practices or form are instructive of larger ideologies (see Ashcraft & Flores, 2003;
Brookey & Westerfelhaus, 2001; Daughton, 1996; Foss, Waters, & Armada, 2007;
Foust & Soukup, 2006; Moreman & Calafell, 2008; Ott & Aoki, 2004; Ott & Bonnstetter, 2007; Payne, 1989; Rasmussen & Downey, 1991; Rushing, 1989; Rushing &
Frentz, 1989, 1999; Watts, 2005, Winn, 2000, 2001, 2003). For example, Moreman
and Calafell examine how the narrative of La Llorona, a mythic Mexican and Chicana/o figure, used in the film Chasing Papi, constructs meanings about Latino
masculinity and citizenship. Additionally, there has been a consistent body of work
within this narrative approach addressing science fiction (see Ono, 2000; Ott & Aoki,
2004; Ott & Bonnstetter, 2007; Rushing, 1989). Drawing upon these bodies of work,
we conduct our own narrative analysis of Star Wars. Ultimately, Star Wars represents
one narrative fragment that coalesces with other fragments in contemporary society,
constructing overarching narratives in society that shape cultural values and identities of audiences concerning topics such as war, politics, and gender. Therefore,
analysis of narrative fragments such as Star Wars can provide scholars and critics
with insight into such overarching narratives.
As we reviewed the Star Wars narrative, we examined the actions and relationships of the Anakin Skywalker character, both as a young Jedi (Episodes IIII) and as
Darth Vader (Episodes IVVI). In particular, we developed themes that helped us to
understand Anakins actions and interactions with other characters in response to
important moral dilemmas that he encountered as a boy (Episode I), an adolescent
and Jedi apprentice (Episode II), a young man and Jedi Knight (Episode III), and an
evil Sith Lord (Episodes IVVI). We took particular interest in the moral dilemmas
faced by Anakin Skywalker as George Lucas has often been quoted as describing the
Star Wars saga as a morality play that teaches audiences about right and wrong (see
Burns, 2005; Schell, 1999). Therefore, by conceptualizing Star Wars as a morality
play, we took interest in situations in which Anakin faced choices that in some way
conflicted with one or more moral obligations; such conflicts are known as moral
dilemmas (see Dougherty & Atkinson, 2006; Sartre, 1957; Sinnott-Armstrong, 1988;
Zimmerman, 1996). Ultimately, we found three primary themes that define Anakins
actions and relationships during moral dilemmas: (a) he is a phantom altruist, (b) he
demonstrates the will of a clone, and (c) he relies on the guise of the Sith. In the
following pages, we review these three themes as they appear through the Star Wars
saga. Each of these themes plays a role in the construction of a gray area of confusion
where Anakins responsibility for his actions can be denied, excused, or shifted to
another person. We follow with a discussion of the relevance of naming this aspect of
hegemonic masculinity and its importance beyond the text.
The phantom altruist: Anakins humble origins and selfless hard work
When we first meet Anakin Skywalker in Episode I: The Phantom Menace (Lucas,
1999), he is approximately 9 years old and a slave on the desert world of Tatooine to
an alien character called Watto, who operates a garage and junk shop. Although
Watto treats Anakin as a slave, he also sees great value in the boys skills as a mechanic
as he states that hes a great credit to [the human] race because of his hard work
and ingenuity fixing equipment.
On Tatooine, the Jedi Knight Qui-Gon Jinn, his apprentice Obi-Wan Kenobi,
and Queen Padme Amidala of Naboo meet Anakin as they seek parts to repair their
ship. As they are aided by Anakin and his mother, his altruism is established for the
audience through Anakins selfless deeds and his mothers statements. For instance,
Anakin enters a dangerous speeder race to help his new friends. His victory in the race
helps Qui-Gon and the others in their cause, to which his mother exclaims: Its so
wonderful Annie! You have brought hope to those who have none! Im so very proud
of you! Padme tells him that they owe him everything, to which Anakin shakes his
head and says: Just feeling this good was worth it. Helping others was a great reward,
and no one owed him anything. But he did earn a reward, as he also won his freedom
when Qui-Gon made a bet with Watto for possession of Anakin. Upon learning that he
has been freed, but not his mother, Anakin despairs. He asks Shmi if he will ever see her
again, to which his mother replies: What does your heart tell you? Anakin says that
his heart says yes, and then vows that he will one day return to free her from bondage.
Shmi then tells her son to be brave and dont look back. Ultimately, this conversation
with his mother stands as a reminder of Anakins brave and altruistic spirit.
The theme of hard work and selflessness permeates every action taken by Anakin
throughout Episode I. When faced with a moral situation of helping others in
desperate need, he selflessly competes in the dangerous pod race or speeds off in
a starfighter not for his own glory or for any reward but for the benefit of others. As
audiences watch the Star Wars saga unfold, they are first presented with an image of
a young boy who worked hard in his humble beginnings and helped others because
of strong values passed on by his mother. Ultimately, hard work and strong values
helped young Anakin to pull himself up by the bootstraps and lift himself out of his
desperate position into an elite upper class in galactic societythe Jedi Knights. This
6
story line functions in many ways like the narrative of the American Dream; if you
work hard enough, you will succeed. This narratives denial of issues of race, class,
and gender (Cloud, 1996) and the ways they are implicated in power and its centering of a White male subjectivity make it no surprise that it serves as a basis for
hegemonic masculinity in this text. Anakins success in conjunction with the ideological fragment of the American Dream further cements an understanding of him as
a good or admirable figure that followed the rules, suffered, and sacrificed. This helps
to frame the understanding and reading of the character later on and excuse his
behavior. Ultimately, the selfless altruist in Episode I seems to be as much of a phantom as the phantom of the future Emperor lurking in the shadows throughout the
movie. When we next meet Anakin in Episode II: Attack of the Clones (Lucas, 2002),
he is narcissistic, jealous, obsessive, and suspicious of authority (see Dees, 2005).
The selfless, altruistic Anakin is never seen again. Whenever Anakin faces moral
dilemmas in Episodes IIVI, his actions are defined by a loss of autonomy or his
reliance on the guise of Darth Vader.
The will of a clone: Anakins convenient loss of autonomy
For such a powerful, strong, and menacing character, Anakin Skywalker seems to
conveniently lose his autonomy and will at crucial moral junctures throughout the
Star Wars saga. This is most obvious in Episode VI: Return of the Jedi (Lucas &
Kershner, 1983) when Darth Vader and the Emperor plot to bring Luke Skywalker
into their presence so that they might corrupt the young Jedi and turn him to the
dark side of the Force. Their plan goes nowhere as Vader plays only a small role in
the confrontation. Instead, Luke engages with the Emperor in a battle of wills over
the fate of Anakin/Vader, who stands helplessly to the side. Luke and the Emperor
talk about Vader as if he is not even in their presence:
Emperor: Im looking forward to completing your training. In time you will call
me Master.
Luke: Youre gravely mistaken. You wont convert me as you did my father.
Emperor: Oh, no, my young Jedi. You will find that it is you who are mistaken
. about a great many things.
Vader (handing the Emperor Lukes lightsaber): His lightsaber.
Emperor: Ah, yes, a Jedis weapon. Much like your fathers. By now you must
know your father can never be turned from the dark side. So will it be with you.
Vader plays some role in the conversation; however, it is a role equivalent to a third
party passing the salt during a dinner conversation between two rivals. Eventually,
Luke and Vader engage in a lightsaber duel, but the real duel is over possession of
Vader. As Luke fights to turn him away from the Emperor, the Emperor seeks to
maintain his grip over his minion. Anakin/Vader himself confirms his own lack of
autonomy in turning away from the dark side of the Force after he has killed the
Emperor when Luke says that he must save his father. You already have, Luke. It
seems as if Anakins turn away from evil during this moral dilemma was not by his
own will but by the will of his son.
More importantly, Anakin abandons his free will and autonomy during crucial
moments, leading to his transformation into Darth Vader in Episodes II and III.
Unlike in Episode VI when his lack of autonomy resulted in more obvious inaction
and gave other characters around him power to push and pull on his identity, in
Episodes II and III, his lack of autonomy leaves a convenient vacuum where two
closely related influences force his hand when he is faced by moral dilemmas: threats
to his family and the deceptions of the Emperor.
Perceived threats to Anakins family force his hand
In Episode II: Attack of the Clones, Anakin is assigned by the Jedi Council to protect
Padme Amidala from would-be assassins. While the couple hides on her home world
of Naboo, Anakin is haunted by horrible nightmares of his mother on Tatooine.
I saw my mother. I saw her as clearly as I see you now. She is suffering, Padme.
Theyre killing her! She is in pain . . . I know Im disobeying my mandate to
protect you. I know I will be punished and possibly thrown out of the Jedi
Order, but I have to go. I have to help her! Im sorry, Padme. I dont have
a choice.
Anakin is faced by the dilemma of disobeying the council to go and save his mother
or remain faithful to the Jedi and leave his mother to an uncertain fate. However, it is
not really a dilemma because, as he states, he doesnt have a choice. Rather than
actually rationalizing his moral obligations to the Jedi and to the protection of
Padme (the woman whom he claims to love), Anakin lets go of his responsibilities
and his autonomy and is now moved about by the patriarchal need to protect the
family described by Trujillo (1991).
When Anakin arrives on Tatooine, he discovers that his mother has been kidnapped by a group of Tusken Raidersa brutal, nomadic people who live in the
wastelandsand so he sets out by himself to find her. When he discovers her in
a Tusken tent, she unfortunately dies in his arms from wounds inflicted upon her by
the Raiders. Once again, Anakin is faced with a moral dilemma: Return immediately
with his mothers remains or seek revenge on the Tusken Raiders. His moral obligations to the Jedi Order should make this a clear choice with an obvious path; as
Yoda, the Jedi Master made clear to Anakin in Episode I: Fear is the path to the dark
side . . . fear leads to anger . . . anger leads to hate . . . hate leads to suffering. Instead,
Anakin ignores Yodas warning, releases himself of autonomy and his obligations,
and gives himself over to passionate anger and rage, killing all the Raiders with his
lightsaber. In his vengeance, he strikes down the innocent and the guilty alike, for
upon returning to Padme, he confesses his brutal actions to her, I . . . I killed them.
I killed them all. Theyre dead, every single one of them. Not just the men, but the
women and the children too. Theyre like animals, and I slaughtered them like
8
animals! I hate them! The implication of this statement is that the women and the
children were not involved in the death of his mother, but Anakin did not differentiate (Dees, 2005). His rage for the murder of his mother called for the violence
and physical dominance demanded of the hypermasculine ideal (e.g., Connell, 1987;
Miller, 2001), which led his hand as he killed everyone in his path. An obvious moral
problem for a young Jedi, but Anakin shows no remorse and seems to be quite
comfortable with the direction of the path on which his passions have led him.
Furthermore, while Anakin exists in the frontier of a galaxy far, far away where
his contact with nonhuman life forms occurs on an everyday basis, it is still important to note his description and George Lucass presentation of the sand people/
Tusken Raiders. They are cast as unruly, animalistic, barbarian, and Others who
speak in a dialect completely unrecognizable to humans. Writing about the genre of
science fiction through an examination of Star Trek: The Next Generation, Vande
Berg (1996) argues that though a future is posited in which racism and race consciousness are nonexistent, a closer analysis of the seriess episodes indicates racial
tensions, differences, and issues have not disappeared; they have merely been transformed into species differences (p. 55). Similarly, Otherness is coded in the presentation of the Tusken Raiders, which serves to normalize the lead human
characters and the attributes associated with them. The Tusken Raiders exist as
a spectacle of Otherness throughout the Star Wars saga who revel in violence,
shooting pod racers riding through the desert, attacking Luke, and torturing
Anakins mother, which position them as villains and bolster Anakins violent
actions against them. When Anakin kills them, it is constructed as greatly out of
his character and necessary while simultaneously normalizing the relationship
between the Tusken Raiders violence and Otherness. Therefore, the narrative is
further constructed for Anakin as the symbol of White hegemonic masculinity to
naturally kill the Others, the Sand People not only because of the pain they have
inflicted upon his family but also because frontiersmanship calls for a real man like
Anakin to bring order to the lawlessness created by the violent Others in the galaxy of
Star Wars (Trujillo, 1991). Like Vande Berg, scholars such as Ono (2000) and
Ramrez Berg (1989) have demonstrated the ways that monsters or aliens are racialized as non-White, reaffirming racist hierarchies and ideologies of Otherness. Ono
argues that these images serve a pedagogical function for ways to understand race,
class, gender, and sexuality. He elaborates through an examination of Buffy the
Vampire Slayer that Whiteness is valorized against the demonization of people of
color or other marked difference (Ono, 2000). Furthermore, this social difference
justifies the characters violent expulsion from the show (Ono, 2000, p. 164).
Anakin exists in a complicated space marked as both privileged and unprivileged
simultaneously; although he possesses the attributes of hegemonic masculinity, he is
cast as unprivileged through his class status and upbringing as a slave. This marginal
status can be used as a tactic to shield his hegemonic masculinity in the same way that
Martin and Yep (2004) argue that White rapper Eminem downplays or negates his
White male privilege by proclaiming himself marginalized white trash.
Interestingly, Anakin experiences little difficulty following the orders of the Jedi
Council later in Episode II when he faces the dilemma of staying on Tatooine with
Padme as Mace Windu, leader of the Jedi Council has instructed, or rushing off to
another planet to rescue Obi-Wan Kenobi. When Padme suggests that they go at
once to aid Obi-Wan, Anakin refuses. Padme protests, Annie, are you just going to
sit here and let him die? Hes your friend! Your mentor! Anakin responds by
justifying his rationale: Hes like my father, but you heard Master Windu. He gave
me strict orders to stay here. The key here is that Obi-Wan is like his father, but not
truly a member of his family, and so, Anakin bases his decision on his oath and
allegiance to the Jedi Council. In fact, earlier in Episode II, Anakin demonstrated
jealousy and loathing of Obi-Wans position and authority. The differentiation
between family and outsider is also reinforced in Episode III when Padme and
Anakin discuss how to deal with their secret marriage, the upcoming birth of their
children, and his role as a Jedi who has taken a path of celibacy and unattachment.
When Padme suggests that they tell Obi-Wan because he can help them, Anakin
quickly refuses.
In Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, Anakin and Padme are secretly married and live
together on the Republic capital world of Coruscant; Anakin has managed to fulfill
the characteristic of heterosexuality associated with hegemonic masculinity (Miller,
2001; Trujillo, 1991). While on Coruscant, Anakin is plagued by nightmares about
Padme, who is pregnant, in which she dies in childbirth. Anakin becomes so consumed by the dream vision concerning the death of his family that when the Supreme
Chancellor of the Republic, Palpatine (who is a Sith Lord in disguise and the
Emperor in Episodes IVVI), approaches him and discusses ancient Sith powers
that allow for the reversal of death, Anakin becomes intrigued. Later, he learns that
Palpatine is a Sith Lord, and Palpatine sets a new moral dilemma before Anakin: He
can join the Sith Lord and learn the powers associated with the dark side of the Force
to save his wife or he can turn Palpatine over to the Jedi. At first, Anakin chooses to
inform Master Windu that Palpatine is the evil threat facing the Jedi and the Republic, institutions that Anakin has sworn to uphold and protect. But as Windu battles
the future Emperor, Anakin again abandons his moral obligations and allows his
passionate concern for his family to guide his actions. Anakin cuts Windus hand off,
allowing for Palpatine to strike down the Jedi leader. Afterward, Palpatine makes
a grim bargain with Anakin: You are fulfilling your destiny, Anakin. Become my
apprentice. Learn to use the dark side of the Force. Within this bargain, Palpatine
raises the issue of destiny, which implies that Anakin has been forced into a fate
that is beyond his choosing. Anakin responds to Palpatines bargain by declaring, I
will do whatever you ask. Just help me save Padmes life. I cant live without her. I
wont let her die. I want the power to stop death. Anakins intentions are clear: He
does not so much covet the power of a Sith Lord or desire to do evil as much as he is
driven to Palpatine to save his wife and unborn child, and in order to save them both,
he must now do the Sith Lords bidding. The first mission that Palpatine assigns to
10
his new apprentice is to slaughter all the young children training to be Jedi, and
Anakin unquestioningly moves to carry out his new masters orders.
Later as Anakin reunites with Padme, he reinforces the notion that his actions
were motivated by circumstances beyond his choice, I am becoming more powerful
than any Jedi has ever dreamed of and Im doing it for you. To protect you. This
narrative of protection and gender relations in the film privileges White heterosexual masculinity by constructing it as universal protector in relation to the distressed
categories of femininity and alien Other (Ott & Aoki, 2004, p. 150). Anakin believes
he must save Padme, who is also protected at a distance by Obi-Wan. This protection
also coincides with Padmes loss of agency throughout the first three films. The oncepowerful Padme is stripped of her human agency through objectification and
a controlling gaze (Ott & Aoki, 2004, p. 155). Padme, a formerly powerful leader
of her home planet of Naboo, suddenly becomes the attractive woman behind the
man so that Anakin can rise as a patriarch (Trujillo, 1991, p. 298, emphasis in
original). In the end, this idea of the universal protector is finally manifested in the
character of Luke Skywalker, who is spoken of throughout the saga as the one who
will bring balance to the Force. Thus, the White male figure who is connected to
hegemonic masculinity is deemed as the universal protector through his role as the
one who will bring balance to the Force through his redemption of Vader.
The Emperors deception compounds the threat to Anakins family
Closely related to Anakins concern for his family is the Emperors deception concerning Padmes safety. In Episode III, Palpatine, the future Emperor, meets with
Anakin after the young Jedi has experienced the horror of Padmes death through
nightmares. During their conversation, Palpatine recalls a story about a Sith Lord,
who was perhaps his own master once upon a time: He had such a knowledge of the
dark side that he could even keep the ones he cared about from dying. The implication is quite clear to Anakin: The Sith are so powerful with the Force that they can
even defy death. Intrigued, Anakin asks for more information about this Sith Lord,
to which Palpatine responds: Unfortunately, he taught his apprentice everything he
knew, then his apprentice killed him in his sleep. Whether or not Palpatine was the
apprentice in the Sith legend is never made clear in the movies. However, when
Palpatine reveals his identity to Anakin later in Episode III, he makes it quite clear
that he possesses the power to defy death:
Only through me can you achieve a power greater than any Jedi. Learn to know
the dark side of the Force, Anakin, and you will be able to save your wife from
certain death . . . Use my knowledge, I beg you.
Palpatine continues to perpetuate this notion later, when Anakin enters Palpatines
chambers and finds Mace Windu and the Sith Lord locked in combat, Palpatine
turns to Anakin and declares, I am your pathway to power. I have the power to save
the one you love! You must choose! You must stop him! Like clockwork, Anakins
concern for his family allows for his convenient lapse in autonomy, and his passions
11
guide his actions. However, after Palpatine has killed Windu, his knowledge about
powers to defy death is not so certain: To cheat death is a power only one [an
apparent reference to the Sith lord] has achieved, but if we work together, I know we
can discover the secret. Suddenly, Palpatine no longer seems to be quite the pathway to power necessary to save Padmes life that he implied earlier. Palpatine either
lied about knowing the power to defy death, lied about his uncertainty concerning
such a power, or made the entire Sith legend up. Any way that Palpatines claims are
taken, at one point or another, he has deceived Anakin about the possibility of saving
his wife. Additionally, other characters help to perpetuate the importance of the
Emperors deception. For instance, when Anakin clashes with his old mentor at
the end of Episode III, Obi-Wan tells him: You have allowed this dark lord to twist
your mind until you have become the very thing you have sworn to destroy. In this
interaction, Obi-Wan supports the avoidance of responsibility thesis by putting
Anakins actions on Emperor Palpatine.
The theme about convenient loss of autonomy creates an effective shield that can
deflect responsibility for crimes and murders away from Anakin. In each instance of
moral depravity throughout Episodes II and III, Anakin has some excuse for his
actions (i.e., avenging the murder of his mother). When his wifes and childs lives
are jeopardized, fear for their well-being convoluted his judgment and guided his
actions. Who can blame a father for trying to protect his wife and child? When
Palpatine demands that he commits the unthinkablewell, he was tricked! There
never seems to be a moment or a moral dilemma in which Anakin freely makes
a decision, on his own, to take actions that he knows are immoral or wrong. In all the
moral dilemmas in which Anakin has multiple options, and in instances where he
feels that his family is threatened, he opts for dishonest and violent actions. Anakins
ability to make moral choices becomes equivalent to a hapless clone trooper who
faces similar moral situations, and like a clone, he is totally obedient to outside
forces, never questioning where those forces will lead him. After Episode III, however, Anakin runs out of excuses for his morally depraved and violent actions because
now his passion, anger, and fear have placed him onto a path that does not (immediately) involve his family and where Emperor Palpatines treachery should be
apparent to him; Padme died despite the Emperors power and promises. He seems
to have finally made a decision about his life, and all his actions henceforth are solely
hisunless he can blame his actions on someone else.
The guise of the Sith: Blame it on Darth Vader!
Anakins avoidance of responsibility is further cemented through the split of Anakin
Skywalker/Darth Vader. This split allows acts of moral depravity to be placed on the
figure of Darth Vader while Anakin, who the audience may most identify with
because of their witnessing of his literal growth and Vaders literal manifestation
of Otherness and villainy, remains devoid of responsibility. Anakins Whiteness,
a key aspect of hegemonic masculinity, is invisible to other characters, to themselves, and not least of all to the audience (Ott & Aoki, 2004, p. 157), whereas
12
Vaders Otherness is continually apparent throughout the film through his dark
body armor, his voice, and heavy breathing. The juxtaposition of Anakin and Vader
naturalizes existing ideologies of Otherness and associations of Whiteness with
purity and Blackness with the abject (Dyer, 1997). This separation of Anakin and
Vader through a manifestation of the evil Other allows Anakin to be devoid of
responsibility as corruption and depravity are naturalized within the figure of
Vaderthe ultimate villainous Other in the film saga. This split and its resulting
avoidance of responsibility is similar to the strategy used by sexual harassers of
creating hypothetical situations of sex and bodily contact to intimidate women while
allowing the harasser to plead innocence as they can claim not to have committed
any physical act (Dougherty & Atkinson, 2006). Heinous actions can be blamed on
Vader even though Anakin is indeed Vader. In Episode IV: A New Hope (Lucas, 1977)
and Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back (Lucas & Kershner, 1980), we witness some of
Anakins most violent and atrocious moral choices as Darth Vader, such as torture
and the brutal murder of men under his command. Vader could have chosen different actions in each situation, but he seems to have freely chosen violence as
a means to achieve his goals.
But is Anakin Skywalker really taking part in these brutal actions? His involvement is not as obvious as one might initially think when one considers his lack of
autonomy and the deception of the Emperor discussed previously. Anakin plays
a passive role in the construction of his new identity, even accepting the name the
Emperor has given him. Additionally, at the end of Episode III, Anakin/Vader clashes
with his former mentor, and Obi-Wan emerges victorious while Anakin/Vaders
body is ruined in the encounter. Afterward, Emperor Palpatine has Anakin/Vaders
remains encased in the black body armor that is introduced to audiences in Episode
IV as Darth Vader. Again, Emperor Palpatine seems to be pulling all the strings.
Ultimately, this passive role in the creation of his new identity allows for Anakin to
once again shield himself from responsibility; he can now hide behind the guise of
the Sith that has been forced upon him. The distancing of Anakin from his actions
through the separation of Anakin and Vader is also reinforced throughout the films
by other characters, such as Obi-Wan who in Episode IV tells Luke Skywalker that his
father was betrayed and murdered by a man named Darth Vader. Even Yoda, the
oldest and wisest of the Jedi, refers to Anakin and Darth Vader as two separate
entities in his discussions with Luke in Episode V. In these revisionist histories,
Anakin is cast as being betrayed by a power larger than himself, absolved from his
actions. In these recollections, Anakin is passive and it is Darth Vader who has
committed the heinous crimes. Anakin can be rehabilitated, Darth Vader cannot.
The themes that emerged from our analysis of Anakin Skywalkers interactions
during moral dilemmas illustrate how a gray area shields Anakin from responsibility
for his actions and makes his redemption feasible for audiences. Similar to the sexual
harasser Jim in Dougherty and Atkinsons (2006) research, Anakins actions and
crimes cannot be outright denied. However, a cloud of confusion hangs around
Anakin providing a shield that excuses him or enables him to shift the blame for
13
such actions and crimes to others. Much like the sharp divisions between men and
women about what constitutes sexual harassment, the portrayal of Anakin Skywalker
as a selfless little boy on Tatooine who embodied frontiersmanship and the American
Dream and his later multiple moral obligations help to construct sharp divisions
between the different choices that he can make. He can follow through on his Jedi
oath or follow through on the strong values passed on by his mother. Republic or
family? For instance, when he encounters Mace Windu moving to strike down
Palpatine, Anakin faces a choice between an action in which his mothers teachings
tell him to do X (e.g., save Palpatine who can help him to protect his family) while his
obligations to the Jedi tell him to do Y (protect the Republic). In response, Anakin
takes action Z (attacking Windu and assisting in his murder), which violates the
tenets of both his mothers teachings and the Jedi Order. The confusion from the
choice between X and Y, as well as Palpatines deceit concerning the Sith power to
save Padme, allows for the emergence of the gray area where Anakins responsibility
for Z is lost in the swirling backdrop of special effects and action. In addition, this
gray area expands when Anakin is given a new guise onto which responsibility for
his later crimes in Episodes IVVI can be shifted. Ultimately, the phantasmal altruist
of Episode I is the only clear image that audiences have of the Anakin Skywalker
character, a character who can easily be forgiven.
Conclusions
Nakayama and Krizek (1995) in their examination of the rhetorical strategies by

which Whiteness maintains its power quote Ruth Frankenberg who writes, whiteness changes over time and space and is in no way a transhistorical essence (p. 303).
We view hegemonic masculinity in the same way, adding to the work of others such
as Ashcraft and Flores (2003), Palmer-Mehta (2006), and Vavrus (2002) who chart
the complex shifts in representations of hegemonic masculinity. In this essay, we
have examined Star Wars, more specifically Anakin Skywalker, as our primary text,
but our analysis and conclusions should in no way be limited to this text. We have
sought to add to the literature concerning the nuanced ways that hegemonic masculinity operates by augmenting Trujillos (1991) work through the introduction of a
sixth characteristic of hegemonic masculinity, which is made possible by Dougherty
and Atkinsons (2006) discussion of avoidance of responsibility through gray areas.
The avoidance of responsibility as a characteristic of hegemonic masculinity allows
a morally weak character to emerge as a heroic figure because all his actions seem to
be driven by forces that have robbed him of his autonomy or those actions were not
his alone, and thus, the character must be judged on his altruistic past.
Each of the five characteristics described by Trujillo is central in laying the
foundation for Anakin and other male characters to be read as heroic figures, the
embodiment of the desired hegemonic masculinity, but it is through his avoidance of
responsibility that these characters are further cemented into a space that positions
them above critique. Other characters within contemporary popular culturesuch
14
as Rambo and Jason Bourneall avoid responsibility for any crimes or violent
actions they take when confronted by moral dilemmas within their respective narrative because they all demonstrate themes similar to the three that arose in our
analysis of Anakin Skywalker: (a) an altruistic past, (b) threats and deceptions that
rob them of their autonomy, and (c) a dark guise that can be blamed for their most
egregious actions. All were altruistic youths, and all have their autonomy taken from
them as the people whom they have sworn to defend (e.g., citizens, family, friends)
are attacked by villains or they are tricked by those very villains; they have no choice
but to engage in violent actions. In addition, each character has a dark guise placed
upon him at some point in his life through the deceit of a villain or through the
above mentioned lack of autonomy. The lack of autonomy, the deceit of a villain,
and guise of the Other provide those characters with a gray area that deflects responsibility and emphasizes their youthful, often phantasmal, altruism.
In both the Rambo series and the Bourne series, the gray area is just as important
but less obvious as physical masks are not involved. In the Rambo films, John Rambo
was a patriotic young man, drafted into the U.S. Army during the Vietnam War.
During the war, he was captured and tortured by North Vietnamese soldiers and was
later humiliated when he was ridiculed by antiwar protesters upon his return to the
United States. These events created a new guise for Rambothe killing machine
associated with the films. The only people whom this new Rambo can trust are his
brothers at arms in the military and innocent young people like Sara Miller in the
2008 Rambo. Whenever villains, such as the Russians or Burmese army, threaten
those whom he trusts, he has no choice but to engage in violent actions. As with
Anakin Skywalker, John Rambo is never fully responsible for any violence as the
threats force his hand. Again, the lack of autonomy and villainous threats create
a cloud of confusion that allows for audiences to focus on the young patriot who can
be forgiven without showing any remorse. Similarly, in the recent Bourne films, Jason
Bourne was born as David Webb, a character whose autonomyand identitywas
taken from him as CIA operatives tortured him in order to make him into an
assassin. After the CIA [Central Intelligence Agency] targets him for elimination,
he loses his memory and begins a quest of rediscovery. Throughout the movie,
whenever Jason Bourne snaps because of certain threats, he reverts to the violent
guise of the CIA assassin. The divide between the guise of Jason Bourne and the
innocent young David Webb coupled with threats to his love interest (Marie Kreutz
in the Bourne Identity and Bourne Supremacy) again creates a gray cloud of confusion
that allows the character to avoid responsibility for his actions and be forgiven.
The gray area and avoidance of responsibility are not confined to action adventure movies like Star Wars and Rambo. In the 2008 romantic comedy Forgetting
Sarah Marshall, Peter Bretter is a young music composer whose life is ripped apart
when his television star girlfriend, Sarah Marshall, leaves him for a glamorous British
rock star. Through flashbacks during the movie, it is revealed that prior to the
breakup, Peter was a fun-loving individual who treated his friends and family with
courtesy and respectan altruist. After the breakup, a dark guise emerges from the
15
emotional trauma of his loss, a moping, self-loathing character who seeks only
alcohol and sex with numerous women. During the course of the movie, he falls
in love with Rachel, an employee of the resort at which he is staying in Hawaii.
Unfortunately, Peter makes some poor relationship decisions, leading to severe
tensions between him and Rachel. Later, Peter learns that one of the bars near the
resort boasts a photo collage of women flashing their breasts in the mens restroom
and that one of the photos is of Rachel; she was apparently tricked into flashing by
her evil ex-boyfriend. Peter responds to this situation by going to steal the photograph, but he is promptly caught by the owner of the bar and threatened with
violence if the photo is not returned. Peter tells the owner that he can beat him all
that he wants, but he will never return the photograph; the owner then beats Peter
severely. Although Peter was not the one who engaged in the violent actions, he was
the one who initiated those actions at this moral juncture of the movie. In fact, after
the beating, he seems to revel in displaying his bruises and wounds to Rachel as he
returns the photograph to her. Ultimately, the deceptions of the villainous bar owner
and ex-boyfriend, coupled with the moping dark guise, obscure Peters poor moral
decisions when dealing with the problem of the photograph; the fun-loving altruist is
easily forgiven by Rachel and the audience.
Such a gray area is similar to the notion of mock-macho illustrated by Hanke
(1998), in that both concepts involve hiding aspects of hegemonic masculinity.
According to Hanke, many television sitcoms use humor concerning hegemonic
masculinity to suggest a new and progressive construction of men while with a wink
and a nod offering male viewers the pleasure of seeing the rational norms of
feminist criticism subverted (p. 80). Essentially, the humor about men being
men on programs like Home Improvement and Coach act to hide critiques of liberal
feminism in contemporary society and carve out spaces for men that are distinct
from feminine/feminist spaces. However, the gray area illustrated in our research is
quite different as it hides the characteristics of hegemonic masculinity and thus
naturalizes all those characteristics, whereas the mock-macho highlights the characteristics of hegemonic masculinity in order to hide the critique of feminism and the
construction of a space that further naturalizes hegemonic masculinity. Essentially,
the gray area emphasizes that men are not at fault for the actions associated with
hegemonic masculinity and, instead, the blame lies elsewhere. In addition, unlike
mock-macho, which is a genre-specific construct, the gray area of hegemonic
masculinity can be observed in multiple genres and across various texts. Indeed,
future research is now required by organizational and interpersonal communication
scholars to look beyond the construction and manifestation of the gray area in texts
and work to explore this characteristic of hegemonic masculinity in real-world workplaces. Our research has illuminated the problem posed by the gray area in contemporary culture; now, the specifics of the problem in everyday life must be brought to
light. In an era of increasing scandals in politics (e.g., Bill Clinton, Alberto Gonzales),
religion (e.g., Ted Haggard), and entertainment (e.g., Mel Gibson), the avoidance of
responsibility thesis has emerged as an appropriate response to secure the place of
16
hegemonic masculinity. Masculine characters such as Anakin Skywalker, Rambo,

and Peter Bretter normalize avoidance of responsibility that in turn creates spaces
of permissiveness for physical violence, sexual violence, harassment, and various
forms of discrimination. In the end, the lessons of hegemonic masculinity are taught
and naturalized across generations.
Note
1
We do not mean to downplay the potentially racist and sexist aspects of the films rather
than delving into each aspect of them; we instead use examples of them to explore how
White hegemonic masculinity is upheld in the films.
References
Ashcraft, K., & Flores, L. A. (2003). Slaves with white collars: Persistent performances of
masculinity in crisis. Text and Performance Quarterly, 23, 129.
Battles, K., & Hilton-Morrow, W. (2002). Gay characters in conventional spaces: Will and
Grace and the situation comedy genre. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 19,
87105.
Berryman-Fink, C., & Riley, K. V. (1997). The role of gender and feminism in perceptions of
sexual and sexually harassing communication. Womens Studies in Communication, 20,
2444.
Booth-Butterfield, M. (1989). Perceptions of harassing communication as a function of locus
of control, work force participation, and gender. Communication Quarterly, 37, 262275.
Brookey, R. A., & Westerfelhaus, R. (2001). Pistols and petticoats, piety and purity in To
Wong and the queering of the American monomyth and marginalizing discourse of
deification. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 18, 141156.
Burns, C. (2005, May 16). Lucas on Iraq war, Star Wars. CNN.com. Retrieved April 24,
2008, from http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/16/cannes.starwars/
Carr, D. (1986). Time, narrative, and history. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Chatman, S. (1990). Coming to terms: The rhetoric of narrative in fiction and film. Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press.
Cloud, D. L. (1996). Hegemony or concordance? The rhetoric of tokenism in Oprah
Winfreys rags-to-riches biography. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 13,
115137.
Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power: Society, the person and sexual politics. Palo Alto, CA:
Stanford University Press.
Daughton, S. M. (1996). The spiritual power of repetitive form: Steps toward transcendence
in Groundhog Day. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 13, 138154.
Dees, R. (2005). Moral ambiguity in a black-and-white universe. In K. Decker & J. Eberl
(Eds.), Star Wars and philosophy: More powerful than you can possibly imagine (pp. 3953).
Chicago: Open Court.
DeFrancisco, V. P., & Palczewski, C. H. (2007). Communicating gender diversity: A critical
approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17
Dougherty, D., & Atkinson, J. (2006). Competing ethical communities and a researchers
dilemma: The case of a sexual harasser. Qualitative Inquiry, 12, 292315.
Dyer, R. (1997). White. New York: Routledge.
Ehrenhaus, P. (1993). Cultural narratives and the therapeutic motif: The political
containment of Vietnam veterans. In D. Mumby (Ed.), Narrative and social control:
Critical perspectives (pp. 7796). London: Sage.
Fisher, W. (1984). Narration as a human communication paradigm: The case of public moral
argument. Communication Monographs, 51, 122.
Fisher, W. (1987). Human communication as narration: Toward a philosophy of reason, value,
and action. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
Foss, S. K., Waters, W. J. C., & Armada, B. J. (2007). Toward a theory of agentic orientation:
Rhetoric and agency in Run Lola Run. Communication Theory, 17(3), 205230.
Foust, C., & Soukup, C. (2006). Do I exist?: Transcendent subjects and secrets in The Sixth
Sense. Western Journal of Communication, 70, 115133.
Garlick, R. (1994). Male and female responses to ambiguous instructor behaviors. Sex Roles:
A Journal of Research, 30, 135158.
Hanke, R. (1990). Hegemonic masculinity in thirtysomething. Critical Studies in Mass
Communication, 7, 231248.
Hanke, R. (1998). The mock-macho situation comedy: Hegemonic masculinity and its
reiteration. Western Journal of Communication, 62, 7493.
Hemphill, M. R., & Pfeiffer, A. L. (1986). Sexual spillover in the workplace: Testing
the appropriateness of male-female interaction. Womens Studies in Communication,
9, 5256.
Lucaites, J. L., & Condit, C. M. (1985). Reconstructing narrative theory: A functional
perspective. Journal of Communication, 35, 90108.
Lucas, G. (Producer/Writer/Director). (1977). Star wars episode IV: A new hope [Motion
picture]. United States: Twentieth Century Fox.
Lucas, G. (Producer/Writer/Director). (1999). Star wars episode I: The phantom menace
[Motion picture]. United States: Twentieth Century Fox.
Lucas, G. (Producer/Writer/Director). (2002). Star wars episode II: Attack of the clones
Lucas, G. (Producer/Writer/Director). (2005). Star wars episode III: Revenge of the Sith
Lucas, G. (Producer), & Kershner, I. (Writer/Director). (1980). Star wars episode V:
The empire strikes back [Motion picture]. United States: Twentieth Century Fox.
Lucas, G. (Producer), & Kershner, I. (Writer/Director). (1983). Star wars episode VI: Return of
the Jedi [Motion picture]. United States: Twentieth Century Fox.
Martin, J. B., & Yep, G. A. (2004). Eminem in mainstream public discourse: Whiteness and
the appropriation of Black masculinity. In R. A. Lind (Ed.), Race/gender/media:
Considering diversity across audiences, content, and producers (pp. 228235). Boston:
Pearson.
McGee, M. (1990). Text, context, and the fragmentation of contemporary culture.
Western Journal of Speech Communication, 54, 274289.
Miller, T. (2001). Sportsex. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
18
Mongeau, P. A., & Blalock, J. (1994). Student evaluations of instructor immediacy and
sexually harassing behaviors: An experimental investigation. Journal of Applied
Communication Research, 22, 256272.
Moreman, S. T., & Calafell, B. M. (2008). Buscando para nuestros hijos: Utilizing La Llorona
for cultural critique. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 1,
309326.
Nakayama, T. K. (1994). Show/down time: Race, gender, sexuality, and popular culture.
Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 8, 162179.
Nakayama, T. K., & Krizek, R. L. (1995). Whiteness: A strategic rhetoric. Quarterly Journal of
Speech, 81, 291309.
Ono, K. A. (2000). To be a vampire on Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Race and (other) socially
marginalizing positions on horror TV. In E. R. Helford (Ed.), Fantasy girls (pp. 163186).
Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Ott, B., & Aoki, E. (2004). Counter-imagination as interpretive practice: Futuristic fantasy
and The Fifth Element. Womens Studies in Communication 27, 149176.
Ott, B., & Bonnstetter, B. (2007). Were at now, now: Spaceballs as parodic tourism.
Southern Communication Journal, 72, 309327.
Palmer-Mehta, V. (2006). The wisdom of folly: Disrupting masculinity in King of the Hill.
Text and Performance Quarterly, 26, 181198.
Payne, D. (1989). The Wizard of Oz: Therapeutic rhetoric in a contemporary media ritual.
Quarterly Journal of Speech, 75, 2539.
Ramrez Berg, C. (1989). Immigrants, aliens, and extraterrestrials: Science fictions alien
other as (among other things) new Hispanic imagery. Cineaction!, 18, 317.
Rasmussen, K., & Downey, S. D. (1991). Dialectical disorientation in Vietnam War films:
Subversion of the mythology of war. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 77, 176195.
Rushing, J. H. (1989). Evolution of the new frontier in Alien and Aliens: Patriarchal
co-optation of the feminine archetype. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 75, 124.
Rushing, J. H., & Frentz, T. S. (1989). The Frankenstein myth in contemporary cinema.
Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 6, 6180.
Rushing, J. H., & Frentz, T. S. (1999). The gods must be crazy: The denial of descent in
academic scholarship. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 85, 229246.
Sartre, J. (1957). Existentialism in humanism. In W. Kaufmann (Ed.), Existentialism from
Dostoevsky to Sartre (pp. 287311). New York: Meridian.
Schell, O. (1999, March 21). George Lucas: A galaxy of myth, money and kids. New York
Times. Online. Retrieved April 24, 2008, from http://partners.nytimes.com/library/film/
032199lucas-wars-profile.html
Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (1988). Moral dilemmas. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
Thacker, R. A., & Gohmann, S. F. (1993). Male/female differences in perceptions and effects of
hostile environment sexual harassment: Reasonable assumptions? Public Personnel
Management, 22, 461472.
Trujillo, N. (1991). Hegemonic masculinity on the mound: Media representations of Nolan
Ryan and American sports culture. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 8, 290308.
Vande Berg, L. R. (1996). Liminality: Worf as metonymic signifier of racial, cultural, and
national differences. In T. Harrison, S. Projansky, K. A. Ono, & E. R. Helford (Eds.),
Enterprise zones: Critical positions on Star Trek (pp. 5168). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
19
Vavrus, M. D. (2002). Domesticating patriarchy: Hegemonic masculinity and televisions

Mr. Mom. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 18, 352375.
Watts, E. K. (2005). Border patrolling and passing in Eminems 8 Mile. Critical Studies in
Media Communication, 22, 187206.
White, J. (1984). When words lose their meaning: Constitutions and reconstitutions of language,
character, and community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Winn, J. E. (2000). Moralizing upward mobility: Investigating the myth of class mobility in
Working Girl. Southern Communication Journal, 66, 4051.
Winn, J. E. (2001). Challenges and compromises in Spike Lees Malcolm X. Critical Studies in
Media Communication, 18, 452465.
Winn, J. E. (2003). Every dream has its price: Personal failure and the American Dream in
Wall Street and The Firm. Southern Communication Journal, 68, 307318.
Zimmerman, M. (1996). The concept of moral obligation. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
20

Anakin

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Anakin

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Communication, Culture & Critique ISSN 1753-9129

Darth Vader Made Me Do It! Anakin

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

control, (b) occupational achievement, (c) familial patriarchy, (d) frontiersmanship,

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

Nakayama and Krizek (1995) in their examination of the rhetorical strategies by

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

hegemonic masculinity. Masculine characters such as Anakin Skywalker, Rambo,

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

Darth Vader Made Me Do It!

J. Atkinson & B. Calafell

Vavrus, M. D. (2002). Domesticating patriarchy: Hegemonic masculinity and televisions

You might also like