Brilliant pregnancy subtext in AOTC!

I'm apparently quite dense.

 

Has anyone popped in the DVD to re-watch the scene?

I would like to hear an explanation of why this dialogue is even included if it does not have the proposed subtext AND why it is specifically this dialogue as opposed to any other (since it's referencing political information that is otherwise arbitrary).

 

TESB was on SpikeTV last nite, and I found myself wondering what Lucas REALLY meant when Chewie screwed three-pee-oh's head on backwards. Or why Luke only used one hand for a handstand. Why did Yoda poke R2 with his gimmer stick? Why did Vader's helmet wiggle in the wind?

I mean, there are a literally millions of saga-spanning SUBTEXTs to think about now...

 

It would be great if Lucas put that much thought into the language and dialogue of his characters. I personally do not think its the case. My take on this exchange is that it explores a political point of departure between the characters. Anakin again expresses his personality-driven view of politics. Padme explains to the audience on her transition from Queen to Senator and her views on being involved. Anakin is arguing that politics needs people like Padme (needs people like Palpatine.) He favors the individual over systemic integrity.

For me that's as simple as it is.

 

Isn't it just foreshadowing the discussion they have on Mustafar later? Anakin puts forward his preference for the "efficiency" of dictatorships, whereas Padme prefers democracy. All the stuff about her background just reinforces that doesn't it?

 

This thread is fantastic.

However, I note that Shmi also had a child, although his name escapes me at the moment. Perhaps you were attempting to exclude her when you discussed only "naturally conceived" children in unpacking the entymology of "elected", as the implication is that the Force was involved with Shmi. However, there remains the matter of the Younglings, who are all younger than the afore-mentioned Shmi child whose name I can't remember. I also seem to recall him killing a mess of Tusken kids as well. Since all these children were clearly born before Luke and Leia, are we to believe that none of those children were naturally conceived, and/or that Padme gave birth to all of them as well? Please advise.

I would also be interested in thoughts as to how Padme could be referencing her pregnancy in AOTC when said pregnancy does not occur until ROTS. This implies some sort of time travel. Was this how Leia was able to have vague memories of her mother in the OT despite Padme dying moments after her birth? Did Padme, foreseeing her death, teleport forward in time to Leia's infancy to get to know her a bit? And if so, why did she not also do so with Luke? Was she hesitant to time travel forward to Tatooine, knowing that it was the location where Shmi's son killed a bunch of Padme's Tusken babies?

 

Well, there are indeed many characters that exist. That said, the only human characters who have two identified parents are Luke and Leia. In fact, the films make a thematic point of excluding the biological parents of all the main characters (if they even have them). There are two exceptions that prove the rule: Cliegg Lars and Padmé's parents. Cliegg's former wife is nonexistent, he is symbolically castrated, and his offspring never has any children. Padmé's parents are only depicted after her death. It's akin to Children of Men, except on a subtextual level reinforced by Lucas' framing. Han Solo presumably has parents, but they "don't exist," for example. And then there are cases like Anakin (the character whose name you forgot) and Boba Fett, in which their births are not natural, as they only have one parent each.

There is a literary device called "foreshadowing," in which a situation or idea serves as a warning or indication of a future event. Considering that Star Wars is full of prediction a the level of plot, it makes sense, structurally, to use this device elsewhere. There is also a literary device called "metaphor," a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable. It's like an analogy. The funny thing is, although Padmé and Anakin are discussing (completely arbitrary) political jargon on a superficial level, their words are also *literally* referring to her pregnancy in ROTS. They *are* literally applicable. This scene is beyond metaphor. It's innuendo, doublespeak, etc. that refers not only to Padmé's operation in political bodies, but also her own "political body." In other words, Padmé and Anakin do not realize that they are, precisely, talking about Padmé's bearing of Luke and Leia and her death, even though they are. This is called "irony," a literary technique, originally used in Greek tragedy, by which the full significance of a character's words or actions are clear to the audience or reader although unknown to the character.

I don't appreciate ignorant perversions of my posts. If you actually did read my posts, I assume that you would have realized that nothing I said could conceivably lead to the conclusion that Padmé birthed everyone in the Star Wars galaxy. This is just plain silly. In fact, the very first line of my opening post is a Padmé quote referring to the fact that she is not only "not the youngest (otherwise) infertile woman ever to be picked out," but also that, logically, she is not the only person to have children. Given that you (apparently) haven't considered even the most overt response to yo

 

"Amending the constitution" of the Galactic Senate is precisely what Palpatine managed to have done. Kenobi references that he 'has managed to stay in power. Something is out of place.' Or, demagogues undermine democracy by levers, buttons and what Herbert calls every man's coin. With "amending the constitution" of the Sovereign System of Naboo, Anakin is championing his preference that a strong leader, whoever it is, should keep the trains running on time. But the respective Constitutions, local and galactic, are designed to have sunset clauses, term limits, equivalences of symbiotic relationships or balance of powers. You propose that Lucas complicate and contradict the ostensible meaning behind the Naboo bridge scene. If Padme's body is the physical reification or representation of the body politic (plausible - I've used this reasoning before), or a symbol of the representative and democratic Senate, then your theory asks that her body's "amendment" be at odds with her philosophical stance to uphold the balance of powers that have ostensibly functioned correctly for centuries. Anakin's insistence on not letting her die is a form of amendment that contradicts her wishes. "Amendment" generally means a hard-won right conferred to the People at the cost of the State, but your theory on "amend" duplicates the collapse of balance of power managed by Palpatine. It should not matter that Padme is eminently qualified to be drafted back into public service. What should matter is that checks and balances have been in place, are in place, and Anakin thinks that a suspension of these would be for the better. Palpatine poses as a Cincinnatus, but he should have been served ostraca like Peisistratus.

If you can cleverly redress this contradiction in your theory, I'll be surprised.

 

Why THANK YOU.

 

How in the sand's of Tattooine is Padme infertile? Etymology, or not... she CLEARLY wasn't infertile, not a barren cow or even remotely resembled a prostitute. I can agree with the Old English in that she was simply a woman. I find the BARREN and COW/kau word-associations to be ludicrous at best, preposterous at worst. She was Picked out to represent her people. No more. No less.

So by your definitions provided on page one, we are to read that line as such:
"But when the prostitute demanded of me to render habitual obedience to the old man... I could not decline her." You can't pick and choose which words get translated back their roots, or when to apply those translation. Habitual obedience means slave, and Padme never acted like one of those. And I still can't get past the 'Queen's' being whores that tell others to becomes slaves for no reason.

 

What is "entymology"?

 

I can elucidate this is aesthetic terms. The "contradiction" between the metaphorical stance embodied by Padmé and the overarching galactic stance with respect to the value of their "amendments" is a reflection of an autonomous detail in rebellion against totality per se as valued in autonomous art. This isn't Star Peace. The significance of the part in relation to the whole is that of anti-totalitarianism from the perspective of Padmé's "constitution." The fact that this amendment, from one "perspective" of democracy, is desirable but complicated (and that Palpatine's in the Senate is not) is itself logically in-line with but opposed to the structural position of "successful amendment to constitution" being totalized. Both are what Anakin wants, one is what Palpatine wants, the other is what Padmé would want, etc. and this must be constantly re-assessed accordingly depending on what level of metaphorical meaning we choose to reflect on. For instance, Anakin says "they tried to amend the constitution," so the idea of holding each metaphor up to a perfect mirror elsewhere is shattered. Padmé's own interests are at odds? Well, what value do we ascribe to the maxim of "sometimes we must let go of our pride and do what is requested of us"? That changes everything. Or what about the fact that Padmé's "public service" structurally lies beyond her own death on this subtextual level? Easy answers are avoided, and Lucas makes sure not to conflate the "constitution of Padmé's body" with the Naboo constitution with the Galactic Constitution. The parallels are set up for exploration. The process by which the movie is presenting these insurgent microcosms is itself aligned with, at least superficially, the process of checks and balances. Anything else would be dishonest reconciliation. There is, at the most basic level, an objectification of the concept of "constitution" that gives Star Wars an inherent allegorical bend that sets it apart from our reality. This is and of itself is, in my mind, justifiable as well as desirable. Building on this, what I find fascinating in this case is how well reification of the doublespeak is avoided within the diegesis. The parallels do not necessarily sync up. The question that

 

Well, according to "entomology," a "queen" is a reproductive female in a colony of social ants, bees, wasps, etc.

She's picked out of Star Wars' legions of infertile females. The prostitute subtext is also there. It's bitterly ironic: a person who misuses their talents or who sacrifices their self-respect for the sake of personal or financial gain. It's the *opposite* of what's happening here to the hilt. I chose to pick out one subtext because I found it interesting, OK? The fact that slavery is even addressed at all should be setting off fireworks. Is Padmé not a slave to Anakin's will? Was Anakin not a slave in his youth? Rhetorical questions!

 

Ummmm... maybe you missed this part where Padme said: "Anakin, you're breaking my heart! You're going down a path I can't follow. ... Stop now, come back!" --Hardly sounds like a slave to someone's will. If anything, the movies contradict your assertion: "So love has blinded YOU then?"

[image=http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/2/28/Anakinchoke.jpg]

 

I know that you missed the part where I said "Rhetorical questions!"

Plus, that line demonstrates exactly that she's a slave to his will.

She works very hard for him without proper remuneration or appreciation. She is excessively dependent upon and controlled by him. She needs him. Your picture is that of a master beating his slave for "disobeying."

If anything, you have been hoisted by your own petard.

 

"You're going down a path I can't follow."-- If that isn't a clear manifestation of independent thinking then there is no point to, or logic in this thread... I no longer believe your efforts were sincere, I believe the sole purpose of this "crazy theory and only the author's POV counts" thread was to bait and flame people until they either concede or leave.

I will excuse myself from this... lugubriousness.

 

Because slaves have no will of their own...right.

This is the kind of dehumanizing attitude used to justify slavery in the first place. Like the genetic docile-ization of the clones. Being a slave encourages independent thinking more than anything. "Someday, I'm gonna fly away from this place."

You failed to back up your arguments so you've resorted to ad hominem attacks.

How cynical do you have to be to think that the most gratuitously maligned, rigorously defended topic this board has seen in years was created with the sole purpose of trolling and flame wars?

 

MisterVader, you've already been warned once for your conduct in this thread, and now I am warning you again. Just because someone disagrees with you or your point of view, you are not entitled to accuse them of personal attacks. If you want to have a disagreement with someone, that's fine. But you must do it by debating their point of view, not them personally. That goes for everyone else as well. Let's keep the conversation constructive, not combative.

 

Strilo edit: I have told you many times not to debate moderating decisions in thread. This is not your place nor is it remotely acceptable.

 

Strilo edit: DJK's warning stated specifically "That goes for everyone else as well. Let's keep the conversation constructive, not combative." This applies to SithStarSlayer's post as well as anyone else who has come close to or crossed the line. I will say it again, if anyone has an issue with a moderating decision or post, please take it to PM. Do not derail a thread with it.

MisterVader, DJK and I agree that this is the last straw for this thread. Any more issues and it's locked.

 

My interpretation of this sentence;

"I wasn't the youngest queen ever elected...but now that I think back on it, I'm not sure I was old enough. I'm not sure I was ready."

First;

"I wasn't the youngest queen ever elected"

Lucas is attempting to answer the questions asked about the last movie. What kind of society elects children for its figure head? Lucas was trying to say that Queen Amidala wasn't unique to this culture and that actually there had been even younger children elected.

Second;

"But now I think back on it, I'm not sure I was old enough. I'm not sure I was ready."

This line is essentially saying that Padme recognise's having children as elected rulers is a stupid idea. It also reflects that Padme recognise's she made mistakes due to her naivety. We the viewer know of one major mistake she made, which was bringing down Valorum, which allowed Palpatine to take over.

To me, that is all this sentence is about. I'm not saying Lucas doesn't lace his movies with lots of subliminal stuff because he definatly does (one obvious one that springs to mind is the ROTS opera scene where the floating ball/Mon Calamari Dancers are clearly enacting an Egg/Spearm/Conception motiff for the moment where Darth Vader begins his conception. There are many more throughout the Saga (PT mainly) So unlike some, I am open to all these kinds of threads, but on this I think your reaching too much. Good effort though.

 

Thanks, G-FETT.

But what about the other two lines of dialogue? You only addressed the first line in isolation.

 

Do you want me to go on?

 

OK, here goes;

"I was relieved when my two terms were up."


She had two terms as queen (ala US President model) and that had been enough for her. Presumably as she got older and wiser she began to realise she wasn't up to the job of rulling a planet at such a young age? Who can blame her? Perhaps she was "burned out" as well? She was ready to go back to a normal life.


"But when the queen asked me to serve as senator...I couldn't refuse her."

This explains why she's still in politics, but in a differant capacity to before. I would think in this society the queen does her stint and then retires from public life normally. Padme going on to become a Senator is quite unusual. It also reflects her status on Naboo and that she is probably beloved by her people (something that becomes more obvious when we see the turn out for her funeral) Padme is dutiful, so despite her reservations she carried on in public office when deep down she probably thinks she shouldn't have done.


"I agree with her. I think the Republic needs you. I'm glad that you chose to serve."

What else is Anakin going to say? As he's in love with her, he's not going to say; "What a terrible decision the queen made! You shouldn't be anywhere near front line politics. Get back to the kitchen sink you wench!" Is he?

 

I completely agree with you that the lines also mean that.