Discussion Let's talk about the Dark Side

[Tiland Kortun]

However, Kreia is a textbook abuser. She lies, manipulates, and gas lights the Exile into thinking she can be trusted by isolating them from their community, telling them they’re special, and then planting seeds of doubt that leave them vulnerable to her agenda.

She’s not telling the truth.

 

[Arlo Renard]

No one said the so-called "Will of the Force" was fair, or just, or morally "good"... except Jedi. This is why writers are so in denial and try so desperately to rework the true nature of Star Wars into a philosophy more acceptable and pleasant to our own human conditions here, in real life, rather than the horror setting Star Wars really is. But in the end, these efforts amount to nothing more than wish fulfillment. There is no end, there is no escape. The wars will continue indefinitely, from this age to the next, and untold billions will die, as the Force continually rebalances itself.

Once you've realized that the Force is a demiurgic entity, and that neither the Jedi nor the Sith offer an adequate answer to this problem, you've begun to take the Kreia pill.

Except our world is the same way, just minus the superpowers. The world is never "officially" saved, at least not by the standards of our made-up concept of time. So I guess we are also living in a horror setting, lol.

But I get what you're saying. I also found Kreia's viewpoint an interesting take on the Force. I'm not about to swallow her pill, however, and it is far from the "truth" of the Force. 'Tis but another interpretation by a character in-universe.

As for the Word of God with regards to Lucas, ehhhh. The man has said many things over the years about SW, and any direct quote can be spun many different ways. I'm of the mind that he still considers it all just a fairytale or fable. Fairytales tend to be symbolic in how they present the world, which means no definitive answers. He also didn't write all of his films, only A New Hope and the prequels. The dude has had involvement in everything SW related in some form up until the Disney buyout, but I doubt he honed in on every single piece of dialogue or throwaway line to make sure it all fit perfectly into his fictional cosmology. Hell, he's even on the record saying "Legends wasn't his Star Wars", which is anything outside the first six movies, including Kreia.

I guess I'm saying that, while you can look to Lucas as a source to back up your interpretation, his word isn't quite law, because he wasn't the only person involved in the creation of SW.

However, Kreia is a textbook abuser. She lies, manipulates, and gaslights the Exile into thinking she can be trusted by isolating them from their community, telling them they’re special, and then planting seeds of doubt that leave them vulnerable to her agenda.

She’s not telling the truth.

I mean, she's propagating her beliefs through her student in hopes of eventually fulfilling her (admittedly insane and impossible) goal of destroying the Force, right? If she had succeeded in her goal, she would have probably destroyed all life in the process. Kreia's answer to the "problem of pain" was to kill everything - and because she's so well-written, you actually understand her point of view. Great villain, really loved that vicious old scow.

Or I guess, if you go the other way, she would've effectively just made the galaxy more like our world, right? Evil and suffering everywhere still, just without the superpowers - in which case, would she have truly succeeded in her goal? Stopping one villain, even a cosmic one, isn't enough to save the galaxy.

 

[Tiland Kortun]

No, I mean she’s literally a narcissistic abuser same as any real narcissistic abuser. That’s how good they are at what they do at isolating their victims and making them believe what they want them to. Nothing she did or said had any basis in reality, except in using the exile for her own goals and purposes. Success was impossible because Kreia wasn’t living in reality. She was in her own sick reality that only existed in her head and what she created in the exile (and this) the player’s head.

 

[Arlo Renard]

No, I mean she’s literally a narcissistic abuser same as any real narcissistic abuser. That’s how good they are at what they do at isolating their victims and making them believe what they want them to. Nothing she did or said had any basis in reality, except in using the exile for her own goals and purposes. Success was impossible because Kreia wasn’t living in reality. She was in her own sick reality that only existed in her head and what she created in the exile (and this) the player’s head.

So she makes the Exile/player think they understand her point of view, and think that it is a valid, rational option, when in reality it is batshit crazy?

I'm actually on the fence when it comes to Kreia. I do agree to some extent that removing the more supernatural elements of Force powers, such as mind-affecting abilities (for which there is no direct equivalent in our world even in a symbolic sense - we haven't figured out how to read people's minds or control them directly - on the other hand, the clones have those chips implanted in their heads, right? Oof.) actually would help to stop some of the more horrific suffering inflicted on people in SW. But the key word here is help, not cure or solve the broader issues the SW universe (and ours) suffer from. And even then, you can argue that many Force abilities are very beneficial, and there is no equivalent to them found even in the wondrous advanced technology of the SW galaxy.

The main problem is, we don't know for certain what would have resulted from Kreia's plan, if it had been possible. Would everyone have died upon being severed from the Force? Probably not, given that she seemed to want everyone to be like the Exile, who willingly cut themselves off from the Force in order to survive. I guess I see Kreia as more of a tragic figure than an abuser, someone who had become delusional and narrow-minded in her cynicism and nihilism. But then I've found it in me to pity abusive characters before, so your mileage will vary.

 

[Tiland Kortun]

People can be simultaneously tragic, pitiable, and abusive. It’s part of their ploys, usually, and a defense they create when someone Honda them accountable. All of a sudden, they’re the victim, bullied and tormented by the world and fate. As for Kreia wanting everyone to be cut off from the Force line the exile…it’s very along the lines of the “you’re so special and nobody else can see it” lovebombing phase.

 

[Vesta]

The force is whatever the author of a given story wants it to be, if we're talking about what it really is. Every character in canon/legends/whatever is an unreliable narrator at best, that's something that should be made really clear. At the point that Star Wars is at right now no author, or writer (as in on an RP board), should be speaking with authority on what the force is, it has been made abundantly clear that the force is not meant to be understood by anyone except just vaguely enough to write a story with it contained within it. While we can argue over the intent behind its conception by Lucas et al, that isn't really the same thing as asking what it is right now. I can see the logic behind both Gren Blidh and Arlo Renard 's line of thought, and that's the current intent behind what the force is - something that can be interpreted differently by everyone so that it a) retains its mystique & allure, and b) doesn't get it locked inside of a box for what it can be down the line in another book/movie/etc.

Of course that's the easy, cop-out, answer; just don't mistake the interesting ones as the (only) right answers.

 

[Arlo Renard]

The force is whatever the author of a given story wants it to be, if we're talking about what it really is. Every character in canon/legends/whatever is an unreliable narrator at best, that's something that should be made really clear. At the point that Star Wars is at right now no author, or writer (as in on an RP board), should be speaking with authority on what the force is, it has been made abundantly clear that the force is not meant to be understood by anyone except just vaguely enough to write a story with it contained within it. While we can argue over the intent behind its conception by Lucas et al, that isn't really the same thing as asking what it is right now. I can see the logic behind both Gren Blidh and Arlo Renard 's line of thought, and that's the current intent behind what the force is - something that can be interpreted differently by everyone so that it a) retains its mystique & allure, and b) doesn't get it locked inside of a box for what it can be down the line in another book/movie/etc.

Of course that's the easy, cop-out, answer; just don't mistake the interesting ones as the (only) right answers.

I figured this was a given, despite the wording of some people's posts being less than ambiguous. Even if we were to establish that someone or certain people's word was law with regards to the Force, it definitely wouldn't be any of the writers on Chaos who would have that kind of authority, lol. I just find discussing this stuff fun, intellectually stimulating, a chance to get my creative juices going, bounce ideas off other people, etc.

 

[Gren Blidh]

Except our world is the same way, just minus the superpowers. The world is never "officially" saved, at least not by the standards of our made-up concept of time. So I guess we are also living in a horror setting, lol.

In some ways yes, others no. Both worlds have suffering, but that's about where the similarities end. It's only a horror if you believe that all suffering is bad and needs to be eliminated at all costs. The other important difference is that in real life, we arguably have some semblance of free will, or at least the will-to-power, which Nietzsche simply described as becoming the most actualized version of yourself possible. We can do this in real life because an omnipresent entity like the Force does not exist to stop us. In Star Wars this is not possible, at least not without cosmic consequences, especially if you are a Force user. Remember, one of the prerequisites of being on "The Light Side" is giving up your individual desires and free will (effectively sacrificing your humanity), for the greater good of all life.

This is why characters like Kreia, and to an extent even Kylo Ren, are interesting. They are the few who are interested in breaking the wheel and transcending the duality of the Force - to use another Nietzchean term, moving Beyond Good and Evil.

As for the Word of God with regards to Lucas, ehhhh. The man has said many things over the years about SW, and any direct quote can be spun many different ways.

To this I would say, listen to what Lucas has to say on the topic. He's very straightforward and unambiguous.

​

See, people try to make the philosophy of Star Wars into more than what it is, because of their desire to change it. But really, Star Wars is quite simple, it's only writers and other fanfic artists that have tried to overcomplicate it to suit their own needs. They can't totally be blamed because the fundamental philosophy of the Star Wars saga, viewed as a whole and not in part, doesn't sit well with Western sensibilities.

Some of what I've said is peppered with my own personal interpretation of that philosophy, yes, but I arrived at these conclusions by taking George Lucas' words at face value, following them to their logical conclusion, and seeing how these ideas reveal themselves in the Star Wars content that exists. I simply choose not to play mental gymnastics with it. I accept Star Wars for what its creator claims it to be. The good, the bad, everything.

People have put lesser stock in George Lucas over the years as a direct consequence of their loss of faith in him as a writer and director. Say what you will about some of his decisions, they are certainly not above criticism, but I think to disregard Lucas as the highest level of canon in Star Wars is itself a form of nihilism, which makes parsing any form of canon out of Star Wars impossible, and thus, also makes doing these fun nerdy deep dives impossible. If Star Wars is merely a conglomerate of the competing headcanons of its various writers and contributors as some would claim, then we really have no leg to stand on when we, say, outlaw certain pieces of technology or a certain style of cartoon avatar in our RPs for being sufficiently "un-Star Warsy".

I understand what you are saying though, and to a degree you are right. Star Wars has become such a massive corporate entity with so many contributors (not all of which have stayed true to Lucas' original vision), that it could almost be said to belong to everyone who touches it. If that is what you believe, then by all means, enjoy your own personal headcanon as I've enjoyed mine. But of course this becomes an issue when groups of us form and try to roleplay in this universe. Some kind of canon needs to be established, such as - what is the nature of the Force? Well, the easiest and most common answer to that question is to watch the movies and listen to what their creator has to say about them.

Anything outside the movies is a lesser form of canon - this is absolutely right, and yes, I fully admit this includes Kreia. However, this also doesn't stop us from examining which pieces of Star Wars material more closely adhere to Lucas' vision and which don't. We can then judge them accordingly.

Kreia is cool because the writers of KOTOR did the exact same thing; they took George's words at face value and created a character to oppose them. She is one of the only characters to actually transvaluate the entire philosophy behind Star Wars, rather than play directly into it.

Finally I would like to add, that even Disney continues to closely consult George Lucas as an advisor. So clearly, his word still means a lot.

 

[Kad Munin]

Iunderstand what you are saying though, and to a degree you are right. Star Wars has become such a massive corporate entity with so many contributors (not all of which have stayed true to Lucas' original vision), that it could almost be said to belong to everyone who touches it. If that is what you believe, then by all means, enjoy your own personal headcanon as I've enjoyed mine. But of course this becomes an issue when groups of us form and try to roleplay in this universe. Some kind of canon needs to be established, such as - what is the nature of the Force? Well, the easiest and most common answer to that question is to watch the movies and listen to what their creator has to say about them.

Does it really? Seems like various Star Wars RP sites have been going just fine for decades now without any direct consensus on what the actual nature of the Force is, same as how outside of the movies (wherein you can even see George's own evolution of the concept that isn't exactly consistent between trilogies) you can see that there's no in-universe consensus.

Makes it feel more real and living, in the same vein that no real world belief systems have complete consensus with each other or with their disparate sects within themselves as to the nature of what is divine, what the beliefs are, the canons of their scriptures they follow, simple doctrinal differences, etc. etc. etc.

 

[Gren Blidh]

Does it really? Seems like various Star Wars RP sites have been going just fine for decades now without any direct consensus on what the actual nature of the Force is, same as how outside of the movies (wherein you can even see George's own evolution of the concept that isn't exactly consistent between trilogies) you can see that there's no in-universe consensus.

Makes it feel more real and living, in the same vein that no real world belief systems have complete consensus with each other or with their disparate sects within themselves as to the nature of what is divine, what the beliefs are, the canons of their scriptures they follow, simple doctrinal differences, etc. etc. etc.

Do not confuse what I'm saying with in-character beliefs. Yes, the divergence of in-character beliefs is fun and exciting.

Where it helps to have a clear understanding of the nature of the Force are in questions that have been posed time and time again. Questions like, is it possible to be a Grey Jedi? Is it possible to be a Sith but not be "corrupted"?

If we roleplay in a universe where the Force binds and flows through every living thing, then we ought to know what the consequences to our characters are for using it in certain ways.

 

[Arlo Renard]

I agree with Kad Munin , it is entirely possible to have an enjoyable RP experience despite differing interpretations with regards to the Force. There are multiple viewpoints in canon and Legends, to say nothing of Chaos lore.

If Star Wars is merely a conglomerate of the competing headcanons of its various writers and contributors as some would claim, then we really have no leg to stand on when we, say, outlaw certain pieces of technology or a certain style of cartoon avatar in our RPs for being sufficiently "un-Star Warsy".

The ban on anime avatars isn't real. It's a meme. Also, the bans on certain types of technology are due to their high likelihood of being abused in an RP setting. This is not a reflection on canon so much as it is necessary to ensure that writers on Chaos are able to have a good experience without having to worry about some jackass whipping out a lightsaber rifle, or charging into battle in "indestructible" armor.

As for the video with Lucas that you posted, much of what he said was more in line with what others have described in this thread than with your "Kreia pill". The Dark Side is unlimited desire, it's "temporary and easy to achieve", while the Light Side is "joy, everlasting, but hard to achieve", selfishness vs selflessnes, etc. I don't see anything about his words that indicates the Force is somehow against Western sensibilities, or even against Nietzsche.

You seem like a pretty well-read and intelligent guy, and I've enjoyed your posts in other discussion threads I've posted in the past. I see that I misunderstood you when I thought you were trying to claim characters should all view the Force the same way. But this idea that fans or writers should all agree OOC on one conceptualization of the Force doesn't work either - unless I am once again misunderstanding you.

Where it helps to have a clear understanding of the nature of the Force are in questions that have been posed time and time again. Questions like, is it possible to be a Grey Jedi? Is it possible to be a Sith but not be "corrupted"?

If we roleplay in a universe where the Force binds and flows through every living thing, then we ought to know what the consequences to our characters are for using it in certain ways.

People don't agree on what it is to be a Gray Jedi. I've personally found the concept itself kind of irrelevant, given that you can be an imperfect Jedi or an imperfect Sith. It's more a question of allegiances, isn't it? Who do you answer to, who are your allies/the people you care about, etc.

I previously argued in this thread during our discussion on Vectivus that it wasn't possible to be an "uncorrupted" Sith, but I would add the addendum that much of SW tends to focus on the "fall" and "redemption" which allows individuals to move between the two states of corruption vs. non-corruption (purity?).

As for consequences, that really is up to the writer, at least on Chaos. We call hits, and we decide our fate. If you're suggesting that the workings of Chaos itself are anathema to SW because we have so much freedom compared to other RP boards, well, that's a hot take I'd like to hear. Lol.

 

[Kad Munin]

I still fail to see the problem in those questions coming up, given that George himself hasn't always been consistent with the Force and what the answers to those questions are can change that way, let alone letting other writers into the mix. Maybe it can just be taken as an excuse to further the whole "each person perceives/relates to the Force uniquely" idea from the High Republic novels. Maybe what's feasible for one person isn't for another.

I like that a whole lot more than one definitive out of universe take that every writer has to follow, tbh, because the lack of a truly singular and definitive out of universe take helped to get the various writers to spawn a lot of the in-universe opposing views that we eventually got that I enjoy so much.

 

[Gren Blidh]

The ban on anime avatars isn't real. It's a meme. Also, the bans on certain types of technology are due to their high likelihood of being abused in an RP setting. This is not a reflection on canon so much as it is necessary to ensure that writers on Chaos are able to have a good experience without having to worry about some jackass whipping out a lightsaber rifle, or charging into battle in "indestructible" armor.

I was half joking about the anime avatars, but what are memes if not a glimpse of reality? We don't allow Mobile Suit Gundams in the factory despite there being no actual technological reason why they can't exist in the Star Wars universe, but we don't allow it because it doesn't feel like Star Wars. There is nothing wrong with that, I agree! My larger point is, even a site like this, that more or less lets people follow their own headcanon, still makes value judgments on what is and isn't Star Wars. I would just prefer the value judgments be made in a more consistent manner rather than being arbitrary.

As for the video with Lucas that you posted, much of what he said was more in line with what others have described in this thread than with your "Kreia pill". The Dark Side is unlimited desire, it's "temporary and easy to achieve", while the Light Side is "joy, everlasting, but hard to achieve", selfishness vs selflessnes, etc. I don't see anything about his words that indicates the Force is somehow against Western sensibilities, or even against Nietzsche.

You seem like a pretty well-read and intelligent guy, and I've enjoyed your posts in other discussion threads I've posted in the past. I see that I misunderstood you when I thought you were trying to claim characters should all view the Force the same way. But this idea that fans or writers should all agree OOC on one conceptualization of the Force doesn't work either - unless I am once again misunderstanding you.

If you're looking for a one-off rhetorical kill shot, I can't provide that. I just linked the first video I found on the subject. Lucas has spoken many times about the nature of the Light and Dark, the Will of the Force, and it needs to all be viewed together. But in that video, Lucas makes some important distinctions.

The fault is probably mine for not clarifying enough. What I'm essentially arguing are 5 points:

1. The Force has a meta-consciousness (i.e. sentience, a will)
2. There are only two ways to interact with the Force (what we call Light and Dark)
3. It is impossible to exist between Light and Dark without eventually falling to either side
4. The Light is the only "natural" way to use the Force
5. The meta-consciousness of the Force works against any "unnatural" use of it (i.e. Sith)

And yes, hot take incoming: I think these 5 points are something every Star Wars writer should agree on. They are confirmed in every movie, (almost) every piece of Star Wars media and everything George Lucas has ever said. Where you go after agreeing on these basic points is up to you. Honestly, I don't think what I'm saying is anything revolutionary lol, I think most people intuitively grasp this when they watch the movies, they just don't spend much time thinking about it.

What does this look like in practice? Whenever the Force is being used incorrectly (the Dark Side), the meta-consciousness must create an equal and opposite reaction to oppose it. This is what Lucas calls "Balance". In the films this manifested in the prophecy of the Chosen One, who was destined to destroy the Sith. We see that this is real and true, because that is what happened, and moreover, that is what George Lucas says happened. Therefore: canon. But it doesn't stop there. The Force will continue to balance itself as long as sentient life exists. Sentient life (i.e. human nature) means there is always the risk of the Dark Side returning. It's in the title of the franchise. The Star Wars are eternal. There is no end to them.

The philosophy of the Light Side is antithetical to the philosophy of Nietzsche. The Jedi demand complete ego death and a life of service and self-sacrifice to be part of their Order. The Jedi believe that all suffering stems from conflict, which has its roots in desire. Attachment, close bonds, personal goals, possessions, the things that make us human, are forbidden because they pull one to the Dark Side. A fundamental principle of Nietzschean philosophy is the will-to-power, which is the natural inclination towards becoming the most actualized version of yourself. There is a determined "youness" that is achieved over the course of your life by experiencing the world and finding what aspects are closest to your authentic being. Achieving that actualization is the greatest achievement. Struggle allows us to learn who we are and become that person.

So you can see, one is life-affirming, the other is life-denying. One embraces adventure and conflict, one denies it.

This is where the Kreia Pill comes in. If we accept that there are only two options, Light and Dark, and that the Will of the Force is to stamp out the Dark Side wherever it crops up, then as a Force-sensitive that leaves you with only two options. Either submit to the Force, live a life of ascetic servitude and give up your humanity, or die. The Force keeps its practitioners enslaved, either way. Worse, this cycle is bound to repeat itself forever. So not only are you doomed to live a life without any sense of individuality, billions will die in never-ending wars, all in the name of achieving Balance.

The Kreia Pill is a rejection of all this. It's an affirmation of the self and of total free will, freed from the chains of the Force altogether. As to whether this is actually possible in Star Wars remains unknown, but it's a fun little thought experiment.

And thanks. I enjoy reading your posts as well. Cheers.

People don't agree on what it is to be a Gray Jedi. I've personally found the concept itself kind of irrelevant, given that you can be an imperfect Jedi or an imperfect Sith. It's more a question of allegiances, isn't it? Who do you answer to, who are your allies/the people you care about, etc.

By "Grey Jedi" I mean a character who uses the Light and the Dark interchangeably, like turning a switch on or off. This could be anything from a character who uses both Light and Dark powers at will, is never corrupted by their use of the Dark Side, or simply a Jedi who still maintains emotional attachments to people or things.

My problem with Grey Jedi is they are basically a form of powergaming because they go against point 3 listed above. We see from the movies, Lucas' commentary and the vast majority of Star Wars entertainment that there is no third way to interact with the Force. There is Light, and there is Dark. A Grey Jedi is basically declaring that the rules of the Force and Star Wars don't apply to them. They're just that special!

I previously argued in this thread during our discussion on Vectivus that it wasn't possible to be an "uncorrupted" Sith, but I would add the addendum that much of SW tends to focus on the "fall" and "redemption" which allows individuals to move between the two states of corruption vs. non-corruption (purity?).

Something like this would be in agreement with the 5 points I'm arguing. It's possible to vacillate between Light and Dark and we see it happen all the time in the lore. But the middle ground is always a transitional period, never the destination.

Anyway, sorry for the long effortpost. I tried to condense my thoughts as much as possible. Alas.

 

[Darth Vehementi]

The view that there is no dark side, simply using the Force to dominate and for selfish means is a Potentium view.
I harken to the belief Bogan, the dark side is not just corrupt acts of a Force User, but is a unique nature of the Force, which is at odds with Ashla, The Light Side. The dark side offers power, while the Light offers inner peace.

 

[Arlo Renard]

I harken to the belief Bogan, the dark side is not just corrupt acts of a Force User, but is a unique nature of the Force, which is at odds with Ashla, The Light Side. The dark side offers power, while the Light offers inner peace.

I'd be interested to see your definition of power, seeing as the Light Side also grants its users power over others/the environment. If a Jedi uses a mind trick on someone, even for a benevolent purpose, that's still an expression of power.

And what about "neutral" abilities, like telekinesis or telepathy? Where does that fall in these philosophies, if it doesn't depend on how you use these abilities?

(ayo thread necromancy, appropriate after the site was down for so long)

 

[Darth Vehementi]

I'd be interested to see your definition of power, seeing as the Light Side also grants its users power over others/the environment. If a Jedi uses a mind trick on someone, even for a benevolent purpose, that's still an expression of power.

And what about "neutral" abilities, like telekinesis or telepathy? Where does that fall in these philosophies, if it doesn't depend on how you use these abilities?

(ayo thread necromancy, appropriate after the site was down for so long)

indeed the Jedi do have power, as Lord Sidious eloquently said, “all who have power fear to lose it, even the Jedi.” The Jedi’s power stems from mastery of the self to serve others (in theory, selfish and corrupt Jedi exist). The Sith and Dark Side seekers seek power in form of dominion, order, and breaking chains, even those of death. The Jedi in theory use their power to protect, bring peace, and keep dark side power at bay; like police, while the Sith path is more direct, “power for power’s sake.” The Jedi diefy the Force, they seek its will and serve it, the Sith wield it and bend it to their will, because its a power to gain greater power; a ladder, while the Jedi see it as a meditation rug.

The neautral abilities.. ah I am tempted to discuss the Dai Bendu, The Je’daii, Grey Jedi, and those who attempt to balance the Force. The truth is the neutral abilities will inevitably be used in a more Jedi way, to serve others and the Republic, or the Sith path to serve one’s self and interests of an empire.

 

[Bohatei Chorva]

I harken to the belief Bogan,

This is a little off topic, but every time I hear people refer to the dark side as the 'Bogan' its also used as another word for hoodlum down here so I always without fail imagine the Bogan as some 30 year old in full Nike clothes cursing at you from their 2001 ford falcon.

As for the actual topic at hand, I'm more on the side of OPs number 2 option, where while the Force on it's own is neutral. But when someone taps into it in the same way a Dark Side user does, they get a taste for that massive amount of power and become hooked. Although, I like to also think that using it in moderation and perhaps balancing it with the Light can help offset that corruption to a degree.

But I'm not terribly knowledgeable on the Force as a whole, so feel free to send my opinion to hell lol.

 

[Darth Vehementi]

This is a little off topic, but every time I hear people refer to the dark side as the 'Bogan' its also used as another word for hoodlum down here so I always without fail imagine the Bogan as some 30 year old in full Nike clothes cursing at you from their 2001 ford falcon.

As for the actual topic at hand, I'm more on the side of OPs number 2 option, where while the Force on it's own is neutral. But when someone taps into it in the same way a Dark Side user does, they get a taste for that massive amount of power and become hooked. Although, I like to also think that using it in moderation and perhaps balancing it with the Light can help offset that corruption to a degree.

But I'm not terribly knowledgeable on the Force as a whole, so feel free to send my opinion to hell lol.

Ah the Light Sith Path, one that is difficult to walk. Granted Darth Gravid went insane and denied the dark side altogether, and started destroying Sith holocrons, and etc. Grey Jedi think they can wield the Light and Dark sides, Lord Revan felt this way, but alas he was unable to conquer The Shadow Emperor via the Bendu path.

 

[Kei Amadis]

Generally, I see it as a corruptive scale, often a cycle. The more you rely on the darkside, the more the traits the character relies on to be used are enhanced or relied on. Repeated in a cycle. If you write them long enough and they survive, even these traits can eventually wear out, and it eats them into nothing over a long period. They wear out because I can get bored of writing them, or moreover justifying them in the character's mind, until there is nothing but the action itself left.

I generally prefer to make it a gradual descent for any darksider I write. I break this convention sometimes and just start with a 'thing', or aspects that are entirely broken in the individual, especially if a faction folds up and I need to remake a character. In this case the darkside perfects that character into a more useful one to whatever character/faction they serve, but they don't often get beyond being objectified in that case. Weapon - Seer - Monster - Assassin etc.

It takes a lot of work to build a nuanced character out of a mindless brute starting point as an example, but ending them at that can be the result of a tragic character arc where they can recall or remember what they once were.

 

[Briana Sal-Soren]

While I myself have never written a strictly darkside character - most either toe the line or have 'struggles' with it... I have always viewed the darkside in the same vein as a highly addictive drug.

Seemingly harmless at first, but leaves you craving more after each time until it's corroded you into someone you weren't and completely destroys your life, forcing you to continue on the same trajectory because you've burned all of your bridges and have nowhere else to turn.