28

The lightsaber is presumably not a very heavy weapon. It's implied to be little more than a handle with a weightless plasma blade, very easy to swing and throw around.

So why do so many people wielding one do so with two hands?

It can't be the weight. And you'd have thought they could do something useful with that free hand. Balance better. Swing from things or punch things during the energetic routines that seem to constitute lightsaber combat. Wield a blaster or, hell, even another lightsaber: we know that's possible because General Grevious does so, as do characters in KOTR (no idea how canon that is).

Bob Tway
  • 5,697
  • 7
  • 31
  • 48
  • 2
    http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/8850/lightsaber-blade-weight-in-universe? – Valorum Jan 24 '16 at 21:31
  • @Richard relevant and interesting, thanks. – Bob Tway Jan 24 '16 at 21:45
  • 3
    @MattThrower lightsabers were meant to be heavy –  Jan 24 '16 at 22:10
  • 12
    Besides the saber weight, there's a high chance you'll hit your rival's lightsaber while dueling, and it's really useful to be using as much hands as you can then - so you can apply more strength. – mgarciaisaia Jan 25 '16 at 00:38
  • 5
    Haven't you noticed what tends to happen to hands when there's a lightsaber nearby? Best to keep them both firmly attached to the handle where it's relatively safe. – Ray Jan 25 '16 at 02:10
  • What makes you think plasma is "weightless"? – Lightness Races in Orbit Jan 25 '16 at 11:36
  • 1
    @LightnessRacesinOrbit I think it's a fair bet that superheated gas is a lot, lot lighter than steel. – Bob Tway Jan 25 '16 at 11:45
  • @MattThrower: Agreed. But. – Lightness Races in Orbit Jan 25 '16 at 12:07
  • From a purely mechanical POV, it's a lot easier to apply (adequate) force to something when you can use two arms to do it rather than one. Like, a pull-up. Or swinging a sword, for a more relevant example. – TylerH Jan 25 '16 at 15:49
  • 2
    People are overlooking the leverage aspect. When wielding a sword, one hand can act as a fulcrum, while the other pulls. The further the second hand is away from the fulcrum, the longer the lever, and then the more force the blade comes down with. – user151841 Jan 25 '16 at 16:10
  • Has it occurred to you that most of a lightsaber fight is spent locking blades? You're still opposing your opponent's strength with your own, regardless of the weight of the blade itself. –  Jan 25 '16 at 16:23
  • In just about every instance I can think of where hands are cut off (with the exception of Dooku) it's when they're using one hand. Maybe it's one of those common-knowledge rules, like 10 and 2 when driving. – St.G Jan 25 '16 at 16:46
  • grievous has a cyborg body. i don't think he's a valid measure of what is typically capable when it comes to fighting with a lightsaber, as his body can move in unnatural ways. additionally, the KOTOR games are now legends canon. – phantom42 Jan 26 '16 at 13:44

3 Answers3

36

Because the evolved lightsaber fighting style is based on the Japanese sword fighting style used by the samurai, now practiced as the sport of Kendo... which uses a two-handed stance.

There's a really interesting ESPN documentary about it, hosted by Mark Hamill, called "Star Wars: Evolution of the Lightsaber Duel" (Full 23 minute show on YouTube).

While the documentary largely addresses the more recent films, The Force Awakens in particular, there is a lot of documentation of how much Lucas took from Japanese filmmakers, particularly Akira Kurosawa.

In this video he specifically mentions being inspired by Seven Samurai and Yojimbo (which is about a ronin, a samurai without a master), which both feature samurai-style fighting.

Catija
  • 1,427
  • 13
  • 19
  • @Davor I think you mean "heavy"? I don't personally know enough about Kendo to know if it's similar or not, personally... but all the people who trained the actors (and the stunt performers who choreographed the fights and, occasionally, fought them) say, very clearly, that it's all based on Kendo... more starting in Episode V and later (RW chronology) than in Episode IV. – Catija Jan 24 '16 at 23:06
  • 4
    Like 90% of Kendo are slashes from above like this: http://img5.visualizeus.com/thumbs/4f/eb/fotografia,japan,kendo-4feb8aca3cd36847216c9f7cc8524590_h.jpg. That is because katana is a big, heavy two-hander, and is used almost like an axe. You are supposed to strike at your opponent's head/shoulder and basically split him in half. I don't think I've ever seen anyone in SW fight like that. – Davor Jan 24 '16 at 23:24
  • @Davor a Japanese sword is about a meter long and weighs about 1-1.5 Kg. This one here is 1008mm long, weighs 1370g and has its balance point at about 155mm from the 鍔 (don't know the English word for it, transliteration is IMHO "tsuba"). It is a quite fragile thing and is not made to cut through bones, although it can do so if you know how to do it. Back to the question: real sword fights don't last long, maybe a couple of seconds if at all, so G.L. and his choreographers needed to invent something more fancy. – deamentiaemundi Jan 25 '16 at 05:09
  • 1
    @deamentiaemundi Can you expand on real sword fights don't last long, maybe a couple of seconds if at all? – erictrigo Jan 25 '16 at 08:48
  • @Antrim Probably more true of Japanese than Western sword fights. Watch Seven Samurai for some excellent examples of startlingly short sword fights. Those Japanese blades were made of a kind of folded steel that could be sharper and stronger than anything in the West and, when used well, had a nasty habit of cutting through everything in one stroke - opponent's sword, opponent's armour, opponent... – user56reinstatemonica8 Jan 25 '16 at 09:16
  • @user568458 - and more importantly, it was very fragile. If you directly block a blow with a katana, you have a pretty good chance of breaking it. It simply wasn't used for the kind of fighting people imagine. – Davor Jan 25 '16 at 09:44
  • 7
    @user568458: That myth keeps on getting passed around, but the steel was folded because it was low-quality steel and the katana wasn't especially good at penetrating armor. You may want to read essays like this one: http://www.thearma.org/essays/hype.htm But maybe if we want to talk about swords, chat might be an appropriate place for the discussion. – Dietrich Epp Jan 25 '16 at 10:03
  • @Davor: I challenge your knowledge about katanas, and swords in general. As swords go, a katana is neither heavy nor fragile, quite the contrary in both respects. The claim that a katana would break if used for blocking is utter BS. I have practiced with katana, as well as with European longswords (of which I own one). The latter are longer, heavier, and more fragile than a katana, but could still be wielded with one hand, and are quite capable of blocking. They, like a katana, are wielded with both hands for control, and power of the stroke. Your comments are misguided, and misleading. – DevSolar Jan 25 '16 at 12:10
  • 1
    @Davor: as someone with a fair amount of practical knowledge of steel metallurgy I'd be interested in seeing some documentation on the fragility of these swords. The folding technique used in producing a katana should produce a stiff blade but one which would return to original shape when deflected (i.e. a spring) . Unless there was a fair amount of some alloying agent such as sulfur in the metal which would make it brittle I don't see why these blades would have been "fragile". Can you provide some references to back up your statements? I'm particularly interested in the metallurgy. Thanks. – Bob Jarvis - Слава Україні Jan 25 '16 at 12:37
  • @BobJarvis On the contrary to the above, Japanese folding techniques are to counteract the poor steel quality of the area. The goal is to have a soft core and a hard outer sheathe, to allow for a sharp but still hardy blade.

    Also, katanas are lightweight. They're hand and a half swords designed for people who were rarely above 5'2" tall.

     –  Jan 25 '16 at 16:21
4

In universe it could be that the force of two lightsabers hitting each other is so strong that the wielder needs to hold on with both hands to fight against it. Similarly when the sabers are locked together it isn't the mass of the object they are holding onto as to why they need two hands it is too fight against the strength of the other person.

Also as mentioned by DaaaahWhoosh two hands can help with the incoming force of blaster bolts when deflecting them otherwise that'd be sure to break bones.

I do not have any evidence for this, just my take on it from what I've seen.

TheLethalCarrot
  • 143,332
  • 64
  • 808
  • 878
-1

They are too long! Hit out one-handed with a weapon that long and you just spin.

blish
  • 1
  • 2
    I don't really follow what you mean here – TheLethalCarrot Jan 25 '16 at 17:26
  • @TheLethalCoder I think they're saying is that swords act as levers, and the longer the blade, the more leverage your opponent has against you. Using a second hand gives you more leverage so you can properly control your blade when striking, as well as blocking things like blaster bolts, some of which could probably break your wrist if you were fighting one-handed. – DaaaahWhoosh Jan 25 '16 at 18:30
  • @DaaaahWhoosh Regarding the blaster bolt part, can I add that into my answer? Seems like a good fit and something I missed – TheLethalCarrot Jan 26 '16 at 08:56
  • @DaaaahWhoosh For the leverage thing unless I'm mistaken I always thought it was mainly the weight of the weapon and partially the force in swinging it forward that could potentially cause you to spin not whether or not you were holding it with one or two hands – TheLethalCarrot Jan 26 '16 at 08:57
  • @TheLethalCoder Yeah, you can add that to your answer. As for your second comment, not too sure what you mean, I was just saying that a second hand always helps to stabilize. – DaaaahWhoosh Jan 26 '16 at 13:17
  • @DaaaahWhoosh Thanks and of course but that doesn't really address the question, more of a comment to the answerer than yourself :) – TheLethalCarrot Jan 26 '16 at 13:29