Hi. This came about because I've seen a few of your posts with a list of George Lucas quotes and feel you've done a lot of research. In any of the quotes you've come across, has Lucas ever mentioned that if Qui-Gon had survived the fight with Maul that Anakin would've remained in the Light? I'm aware Filoni has discussed this topic but I haven't come seen anything from Lucas on it. Thanks for any assistance you can provide.

Hey there! Sorry for the incredibly late reply, had to gather all the relevant quotes and lay out my thoughts! 

CONTEXT:

The question asks about this interpretation that Dave Filoni has of the fight between Qui-Gon and Darth Maul, posited in Disney: Gallery - The Mandalorian:

Many people go with the notion that “Dave Filoni is basically George Lucas’s ‘Padawan’, so what he says is in line with Lucas’s vision.”

So... is it?

SHORT ANSWER:

No.

Lucas never publicly mentioned any of this was the case. At times, he outright stated the contrary.

LONG ANSWER:

#1: Why the title "Duel of the Fates"?

Quotes from George Lucas and John Williams mention nothing about how this duel between Qui-Gon and Darth Maul will decide Anakin's fate.

Per John Williams, it’s about the conflict between Good and Evil.

Probably why, instead of being re-used in the fight between Anakin and Obi-Wan like it was intended to, Lucas used this theme in the duel between Yoda and Sidious. A duel that Matthew Stover sums up beautifully as:

#2: When is Anakin's fate decided, according to Lucas?

The notion that Anakin was doomed to fail from the get-go is going against the principle of choice that George was adamant to include in the Prequels.

Yes, fate/destiny plays a part in Star Wars, but whether you follow it is contingent on your choices and the choices of those around you. As Lucas puts it:

If I had to think of an example:

Darth Maul was Darth Sidious’ apprentice and eventual heir. He chose to give in to his arrogance - as he usually tended to - and mess around with Obi-Wan instead of just pushing him down the reactor shaft with the Force and secure the kill...

... and that cost him his future. For the rest of his life, Maul was never able to gain access to the power he had once been promised, when he was destined to become so much more.

So, in this case:

Anakin is the Chosen One. AKA, the Force chose him to destroy the Sith (who keep trying to enslave the Force and bend it to their will) and bring Balance to the Force. That’s his destiny, his fate. However, Anakin chooses to join the Dark Side and, thus, completely destroys the Balance and leaves the Force in darkness.

But this fall wasn’t decided by the outcome of some duel.

It was a progressive process that was mainly decided by Anakin’s own flaws and choices...

... and Palpatine’s manipulations (which influenced Anakin into making those choices rather than wiser ones).

Says Lucas, the first real step was killing the Tuskens in a fit of rage and then vowing he would never let anyone close to him die again. Another step was killing Dooku, knowing he was defenseless.

The definitive final step, the moment where Anakin’s future was truly decided and he turned, was letting Mace die and joining Sidious in order to stop Padmé from dying, AKA going against the Fates and the natural cycle of life and death.

Each of these actions individually aren’t enough to cause one to fully fall to the Dark Side. Put together, with one action building up to the next? That’ll do it.

It was a collection of bad choices that made Anakin fall. Conversely, it was one good choice that made him rise again.

The Force is screaming at Luke that if he’s not careful, he’ll become the next Darth Vader. Luke eventually manages to listen to that warning, reject his hate for Vader and embrace the compassion he has for his father... and thus allows Anakin to finally embrace his own fate, fulfill his destiny and bring the Force back to its natural balanced state.

#3: Are the Jedi compassionate?

Here's what Filoni says about this (left) vs what Lucas says (right).

Filoni says the Prequel Jedi should be compassionate, in theory, but aren’t (but not Qui-Gon, Qui-Gon is ahead of them all). 

Lucas says Jedi are compassionate, period. Note how he doesn’t make a distinction between “Prequel Jedi” and “OT Jedi”. They’re just Jedi. 

#4: Qui-Gon & the Jedi Order.

To sum up Filoni’s reasoning in the previously posted quotes:

CONCLUSION: The Jedi have lost their way by becoming detached, dispassionate, arrogant and political, which is how they were deceived by the Sith and joined the war and couldn’t sense Sidious even though they were in the same room as him every day. The only one who is still being a Jedi the right way is Qui-Gon, who is compassionate and knows that you can love people without possessing them. Because of this viewpoint, he hasn’t been allowed on the Council. By extension, Obi-Wan, Anakin and Ahsoka are also sort of special because they’re coming from his lineage.

Dave Filoni isn’t the only one who holds Qui-Gon up as this figure who is ahead of the curb, the one True Jedi who is still follows the real path. A lot of fans who read the EU books, specifically the Jedi Apprentice series, see him this way. It’s actually a very popular interpretation.

But almost all the stuff that’s in the Jedi Apprentice series comes from Jude Watson, Dave Wolverton, David Levithan and LucasFilm editors Sarah Hines Stephens and Jane Mason. Not George Lucas.

Tahl, Siri Tachi, Qui-Gon’s characterization, these were all elements decided on by Jude Watson and Dave Wolverton in order to create sources of drama for the stories they were telling. Aside from the script and Terry Brooks’s novelization of The Phantom Menace, they basically had carte blanche to define Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon.

So what did Lucas say about the Jedi and Qui-Gon?

#1. Jedi are indeed allowed to love. Qui-Gon isn’t the only one who knows you can love someone without being attached to them. That’s standard Jedi stuff.

It’s part of the teachings.

We know this because Anakin - despite having problems applying it - literally explains the Jedi principle of non-attachment to Padmé in Episode II.

#2. Qui-Gon in Lucas’s mind. Let’s just look at how Lucas describes the character itself.

Okay, so Lucas says that Qui-Gon is a rebel, a maverick, who is bold and doesn’t go along, who pushes the envelope and moves beyond the bounds. He’s not neutral, he’s got firm principles and does things his way. He’s a strong, noble, centered character.

But nowhere does Lucas say that he’s “ahead of the rest of the Jedi” or that he’s “special” in some way. He’s a Jedi who disagrees with the Council and operates differently than they usually do. That’s it.

On the contrary, while Lucas does grant Qui-Gon’s instinct about Anakin is correct, he defines his decision as “wrong”, “controversial” and “the source of much of the problems that develop later on”. And if you look at the quotes piled on the left, there’s a very clear similarity drawn between the characters of Qui-Gon and Anakin. So the decision of taking Anakin from his mother and demanding the Jedi train this kid filled with fear as a Padawan straight away is meant to be framed as an impulsive move on Qui-Gon’s part, not unlike one Anakin would make.

But hey, let’s look past Lucas’s words, at what was said about Qui-Gon right before and right after The Phantom Menace was released:

Pretty much the same stuff. Headstrong, maverick, unruly. He feels and acts on instinct, rather than hanging back and thinking, he’s very empathetic. He’s more prone to action than your average Jedi.

At no point, be it in Lucas’s words or in the material released alongside Episode I, do we see anything about him “being more compassionate than your average Jedi” or “being the only Jedi to know that you can love someone without getting attached”.

Why?

Because it’s a character trait that was added later, in the now-non canon EU, and not by Lucas.

#3. Why the Jedi get deceived by the Sith.

The Jedi know the Dark Side has clouded everything. It’s not just the Sith. It’s the Hutts, it’s the corrupt Senators and greedy bureaucrats, it’s the pirates, etc. Tracking down the Sith’s specific brand of evil is like looking for a needle in a haystack.

The Jedi are one of the last meaningful beacons of light in the galaxy and they’re just being overwhelmed. They’re being deceived because instead of meeting them on a battlefield, the Sith decided to use politics (which the Jedi suck at) as a weapon and turn the very thing the Jedi were fighting for into what brings about their end.

But hey, no mentioning of “lack of compassion” or Qui-Gon, here. Moving on.

#4. The Jedi being political & losing the war.

They’re ambassadors of the Senate. They’re not political, their role is diplomatic. We see them continuously abstaining from getting involved in politics until the war forces them to.

Then, when they’re in the war, they’re getting manhandled by literally every politician shown in TCW (because of course they are, they’re warrior monks; once again, they suck at politics).

They lose the war because they’re not soldiers, they’re diplomats. They didn’t wanna fight it in the first place, Lucas makes it clear that they were drafted into service. And the reason they didn’t dodge the draft is because the Separatists were enslaving planets and hurting people by testing weapons on them, neutrality be damned.

It’s clearly shown, multiple times throughout canon, that the Jedi don’t want to be involved in it and yet Palpatine continuously orders them to keep on fighting.

Now, the war does make the Jedi lose their way and compromise on their principles. It’s designed to do so, it’s one big political manipulation (and seeing as the Jedi suck at politics, they fall for it). And sure, they do lose sight of the little guy to focus on the war effort, but all that really does is that the bulk of the galaxy doesn’t mourn the Jedi’s downfall, it doesn’t cause that downfall.

So again, it’s got nothing to do with them being dispassionate or anything like that.

#6. What Yoda really meant by saying Jedi were arrogant. George Lucas comments two times on the subject of “Jedi arrogance” in the director’s commentary of Attack of the Clones.

So the Jocasta Nu scene is meant to represent this idea that the Jedi are completely disarmed in front of the upcoming conflict. They’ve grown lax, complacent, they’ve lowered their guard (which happens, in times of peace).

Still, them being complacent has nothing to do with them getting “dispassionate” or “detached”.

Like, even if they were (which they’re not, as pointed out in the previous section and point #1: they are compassionate and they are allowed to love), it wouldn’t be relevant because being less compassionate isn’t what makes you miss a planet getting erased from the Archives. If anything, they were so compassionate and trusting towards Dooku that it enabled him to sabotage the Archives the way he did.

Then we get to the Yoda scene.

Here’s what Lucas had to say.

While Yoda is generalizing, the subtext in his words is: “Obi-Wan, cut the kid some slack, you can be arrogant too, sometimes.”

Which, to be frank...

... is a fair point.

But I’d argue that’s part of an arc Obi-Wan and Anakin go through, in Episode II.

We start out in Episode II and their relationship is good. They’re joking around, there’s a symbiosis, Obi-Wan’s the by-the-book one, Anakin’s the boundary-tester, they complement each other. That’s why the elevator scene is there, it’s to establish what their relationship is normally like.

And Lucas said in 2008: you wanna see Anakin (and, by extension, his relationship with Obi-Wan) under normal circumstances? Watch The Clone Wars.

So they’re all good, minus the occasional bickering you’d get in any parent-child relationship... then Anakin sees Padmé for the first time in 10 years and she calls him a “little boy”. This makes Anakin overcompensate in hopes of impressing her and causes tension between him and Obi-Wan.

From that point on, Anakin gets more impulsive and petulant than he usually is, and Obi-Wan becomes more of a stern, overprotective, helicopter parent.

They both think they know better, and they both have valid points: 

By the end of the movie, Obi-Wan learns to put faith in his Padawan’s judgement and abilities...

... and Anakin does begin to put his duty before his wants...

... but he still lets his emotions rule him and overestimates himself, which costs him an arm.

While we’re on the subject, let’s segue to the next (and second-to-last) section.

#5: Obi-Wan as a teacher, compared to Qui-Gon.

So regarding the thing Filoni said about Obi-Wan not being a father figure, but a brother figure... I mean...

... but that aside, Lucas makes it clear that Obi-Wan is basically filling both roles, as a mentor.

Lucas doesn’t pin Anakin’s failure on Obi-Wan. As he explains... he did his best.

The problem wasn’t that Obi-Wan wasn’t up to the task, it’s that Palpatine was always sabotaging his teachings so that Anakin would learn the theory but never apply it. Had Palpatine - I dunno - tripped and fallen to his death upon being made Chancellor, Anakin would’ve turned out A-Okay.

But in reference to Obi-Wan’s attitude towards Jar Jar and Anakin, in Episode I... that’s also part of Obi-Wan’s arc.

In Episode I, Obi-Wan’s arc is learning to listen to “the Guide”.

Obi-Wan’s attitude isn’t indicative of the Jedi in general. It’s just who he is. Call it a personality trait or a full-on flaw, he’s a guarded, prudent person. As opposed to Qui-Gon, who is much more bold and listens to his instincts and the Living Force, instead of bogging himself down in thought. Because of this, Qui-Gon is likelier to listen to people like Jar Jar and Anakin (aka, the Guide) than Obi-Wan.

There’s literally a comic published in 1999 about this specific thing.

When Qui-Gon finds Jar Jar, Obi-Wan thinks it’s pointless and it’ll just weigh them down. When Qui-Gon finds Anakin, Obi-Wan is wary 'cause this kid might be dangerous... and he is proven wrong on both accounts. Jar Jar is key to the Naboo’s alliance with the Gungans and Anakin wins the Battle of Naboo.

So guess what? While he’s reluctant at first, he decides to train Anakin, with or without the Council’s approval. He takes on some of that rebelliousness Qui-Gon had. He learns to trust the Guide.

Skip to 10 years later, and his go-to is listening to the Guide, this time personified in Dexter Jettster.

There you go, that’s Obi-Wan’s arc in Episode I.

It’s not about Obi-Wan being “uncaring”, it’s about him learning to believe in the Guide as Qui-Gon would.

#5: Dave Filoni’s headcanon.

Finally, I wanted to clarify that this does not mean “Filoni doesn’t know jack about Star Wars”. A lot of the stuff he says about how the Force and the Dark Side work is similar to what Lucas said and did. For the most part, he does get it.

If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say the conversations in Disney Gallery: The Mandalorian (including the part where Dave talks about the Prequels) must've been edited around a bit, for pacing purposes. Y’know, like, trimming some of the various "uhms" and "likes" and "y'know" and side-trackings, that sort of stuff which happens all the time with documentaries.

‘Reason I think this is that every time Dave brings up interpretations like this one, he's always careful to clarify that this is just his headcanon. It's how he sees things, not necessarily how they are.

So my guess is that Dave must've mentioned - at some point in that conversation - that this was all his headcanon, and that bit just got removed because the editor(s) felt that it was obvious and didn't need it to be stated out loud.

Also, while he’s not talking about Jedi (he’s talking about Kallus and Zeb becoming friends in Season 2) I think this quote could give us an idea of where Dave is coming from with this interpretation:

So Dave is clearly describing a personal source of inspiration in the above quote. If that is also where he’s coming from with the “Prequel Jedi were detached/Qui-Gon as ahead of them” interpretation, I can’t really blame him for choosing to see the Prequels through a prism that makes them bearable for him. At least he’s engaging with the content rather than bashing it.

Which is more important than you’d think.

I’m a Prequel kid, and grew up loving BOTH the Original Trilogy and the Prequels, with a preference for the latter. But I couldn’t properly enjoy these films (for which I was the target demographic) without also seeing 30+ year olds (who weren’t the target demgraphic anymore) criticize the Prequels and The Clone Wars into oblivion because it wasn’t what they were hoping for.

Then one day, in university (2014, good times), we were asked what our favorite film was. I reluctantly said my favorite movie is “Revenge of the Sith, and I know it’s a bad film, but screw it, it’s my fav--

-- and all my classmates - Prequel kids like me, now grown up - interrupt me saying that “What? It’s not a bad film! The Prequels are awesome!” and listing everything they loved about those movies for a full minute.

Holy shit, how good that felt.

And Dave clearly gets that, as indicated by this quote.

If you go back to what he says in Disney Gallery: The Mandalorian, he admits stuff like the Jedi Council isn’t something he was expecting. But rather than whining about it, he had the creative instinct to put a spin on the Prequels that came from a personal place, which enabled him (and other people from his generation) to like them more. 

And I’m grateful for that.

But when people online say Dave’s headcanon is exactly what Lucas was going for when making the Prequels... sorry, but - judging only by the George Lucas quotes I’ve collected till now - I’m gonna say that’s not the case.

Which means that depending on how you see the Prequels, this headcanon about the Jedi Order is either an improvement on what the author originally intended to convey, or a deterioration.