I can definitely see your point, though my gut feelings are very different than yours. I was 7 when I first saw "Star Wars," and like you, I fixated on it to a startling degree (insert all those typical childhood memories here, of action figures and acting out scenes in my basement, etc etc.) - but my fixation was always on Luke. Which may be why I find myself embracing the story of Anakin, rather than being forced to acknowledge it against my full will. Does that make sense?

And yes, I too wondered about the wisdom of placing Luke with Anakin's family and giving him the Skywalker name. It was actually the first question I asked my companions when I walked out of the theater. But I have to admit, I'm simply too much in love with the film (and with all six of them as a whole) to think about it too much. It's like ignoring a big zit on the face of someone I love. *g* I suspect I may feel differently about that particular once my buzz wears off, and it will probably become something that needles at me. (Though, I'm not sure I agree that Anakin would suspect the baby had survived - it seemed that they went out of their way to make her still look fully pregnant at her funeral, so it's entirely possible [to me] that he believes the baby died, too.)

I know I'll never get that first impression of/reaction to Star Wars back again, ever, untainted by Lucas' tinkering.

Here, I also agree, and empathize. I wonder, though - could at least part of this be simply because we are older, more jaded, with years of living and learning behind us? I know that seems simplistic, but I wondered the same thing myself as I watched my 6 year-old son watch "Sith" -- oblivious to any connotations or subtext or expectations, he watched "Sith" with the same kind of unfettered glee that I felt for "Star Wars" at his age. It was actually more exciting for me to see *him* react to it, you know what I mean? *ponders*