PT Senator Decoys

I have a few questions about Senator Decoys that I'll put into a list:
1. I thought that having a decoy was only for the Queen of Naboo?
2. If Padme has a decoy, does Palpatine have a decoy?
3. How did Corde fail Padme, isn't that what she was supposed to do?
4. Why would you sign up for such a job?
5. Padme has another decoy, Dorme???

 

Don't forget Sabe, I remember Keira Knightley refused to play a decoy in EP II so they used Corde.

 

1. Padme was a former queen, and all of her old handmaidens stayed with her after she resigned.
2. No, see above.
3. She most likely felt that she should have been around longer to protect her more.
4. Extreme loyalty and dedication to the person you're being a decoy for.
5. She has several.

 

Why did she have to talk all weird when in political mode? That bugs me. Anyway, I thought only Saddam Hussein and Hitler types were the only ones who used decoys? JFK shoulda taken note. What makes a politicians life more valuable than the decoy? I mean, representative democracy will have other people waiting to take the role of politician. My point is, only dictators use decoys because they're seen as irreplaceable (in their own minds and by their subjects). The fact she used a decoy makes me not like her. It's cowardly and egotistical.

 

No, see Palpatine didn't have a decoy. It was actually his evil clone named Sidious.

 

1. Anyone can have decoy
2. palpatine might have one, who knows
3. she failed because she lost her life hence being unable to continue servine Padme
4. People do crazy things.
5. she has lots

 

Darth kRrud made a very very good point

 

I took that as a cultural thing with Naboo. Palpatine probably rejected it because he wouldn't want anyone that close to him other than the ones he chooses for his own purposes.

 

Essentially this, only I challenge the idea that the Senator Palpatine ever rejected the tradition of Nubian symmetry. Palpatine just flattens his decoys into one body, a Janus-face supernatural twosome. Also: "After her, this one's a decoy!" vs "But who was destroyed, the master or the apprentice?" It's the critical undercurrent of the whole film, doppelgangers hiding in plain sight, and the most subtle resemblance in TPM is lethal once discovered.

 

Palpatine has no doppleganger. He uses many forms of deception and is obviously duplicitious in nature, but he has no doppleganger. He acts as his own Palpatine/Sidious, but he has no counterpart other than himself.

 

I believe the speech is merely a tradition or a ceremonial aspect of her role. Similar to how the Queen wears elaborate dress. It's probably related to the culture of Naboo and has the added benefit of disguising her voice.

In regards to decoys -- the President of the United States uses a variety of decoys. Body doubles aren't actually utilized as far as I know, but as a security measure, the President always travels in a group of identical helicopters with one carrying the President and the others serving as decoys, for example. As to the question of what makes a politician's life more valuable than that of the decoy, the answer is: nothing. But decoys are people who choose to serve -- to place their lives in danger to protect a head of state. For the US President, every Secret Service member is expected to be willing to lay down his or her life to protect the president.

It's not cowardly or egotistical -- it's a practical security measure. These are not people who are forced into the role and they know what they were signing up for as the threat to Padmé's life was not unknown. Importantly, decoys give an extra layer of protection to people such as Padmé who are advocating for controversial measures that are, nonetheless, must be discussed for a functional democracy.

 

Which is exactly my point. Palpatine/Sidious owns his identity, he IS his doppelganger, which is what allows him to outwit and outmanuever almost every other character in the series, most of whom are unconscious of the mechanics of the world they're in and how they're mirrored endlessly in other characters (Hooded Jedi/Hooded Sith, Jar Jar/Battle Droids, Padme/Sabe and Naboo/Neimodians, Ben/Maul). "Always two there are." His only challenger turns out to be Padme, who defeats her Viceroy double by making conscious use of her decoy the same way Palpatine does. Compare her final throne room dupe to Palpatine/Sidious' entire endgame scheme, it's the same misdirection.

On the subject of Padme/Amidala's voice modulation: consider how Anakin's voice changes once he becomes Vader. Masks being removed. The key is to not think about this stuff so literally.

 

OK, but that really isn't what I meant at all. If Naboo tradition is that their politicians carry with them these body doubles as guards, and he clearly doesn't have them, he has abandoned that tradition. And the reason is clear, he isn't able to allow outsiders in his inner circle because of his secret.

I think we are making two very different points. There are some stylistic similarities in the way the movie itself is structured, but I'm talking more about the characters motivations.

 

I just think 'abandoned' is too strong a word, Palpatine and Padme are undoubtedly using the same cultural strategies. Palpatine is doing an evolved, supernatural version of Padme's schtick, and he's skilled enough to do it alone (although you could say Maul is a form of 'handmaiden'). It's all the same point, really - I just think the resemblance reveals more than the difference. Everything is connected here. I definitely agree with you in principle, just jumping off your comment to make a larger point of my own.

 

But are Palpatine's actions really a result of Naboo tradition, or Sith. The fact that Sith traditionally take Sith names themselves seems to be to help them create this duplicitous lifestyle.

 

Could be either, neither or both. Ignoring the EU, which tends to distort or misinterpret Lucas's overall scheme, our knowledge of the Sith begins and ends with Palpatine and his short-lived apprentices, which seems to suggest that the origin of all this intentional Sith-symmetry is with Palpatine's Nubian heritage. In-universe explanations tend to fall short in this arena anyway, since the whole series is essentially allegorical and concerns itself more with pointing out these paradoxes in human behavior than creating artificial solutions for them.

 

. . . or because they're much more likely to be the target of successful assassination attempts

 

goes with the job then doesn't it?

a bit like a fireman going to a house ablaze and going

"not going in there, you do realise it's on fire right?"

 

If a US president had a bunch of people who looked exactly like them running around with the idea that the look alike would be killed in lieu of the actual politician it would be a sad state of affairs. Kim Jong did it. Saddam did it. Hitler did it. Using a motorcade is far different than body doubles. That silly movie 'dictator' comes to mind.

 

Can't take the heat, get outta the kitchen. That part of putting yourself in a position of authority/power. Security measures should be taken as in reality they are but body doubles is, well, when the USA starts practicing that let me know.

 

I don't see how exactly a body double is more heinous than a "helicopter double" or a secret service agent willing to die for you. The problem with Kim Jong, Saddam, and Hitler is not necessarily that they employed body doubles, but that they forced these people into those roles, with no regard to their choice and human agency.

If you're using a helicopter double, that's essentially the same thing as a body double -- you're disguising someone else as yourself with the intention of protecting your own life. But in the case of the President of the United States (and Padmé), these positions are voluntary. It's a service and a choice, not a dictatorial edict.

 

Like I said, let me know when a US president starts using body doubles. They could, you should ask yourself why they don't.

 

Who says they don't? They've certainly considered it:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...rity-team-could-use-presidential-doubles.html

But explain this to me:

How is using a helicopter decoy for protection different than using a physical person?

In both cases, an attacker is unable to tell the target and the decoy apart due to a physical resemblance. In both cases, there is a high probability the decoy could die should he or she be attacked. If the position is voluntary, why is it more heinous to use a body double than a helicopter double?

 

because it goes against her character?

 

Why does it go against her character? Padmé herself is against increased security and feels guilty for Cordé's death -- she doesn't have much choice in the matter though if she wants to be a Senator and she doesn't have complete say over her security anyway (as seen by her being forced to go into hiding).

I'm against body doubles primarily because in dictatorships, they often force the body doubles to serve against their will -- forcibly taking them from their families or blackmailing their loved ones. But when it is done as a service, in the line of duty with full understanding of the risks, I don't see how it's all that different from being a Secret Service agent. As long as the position is voluntary.