Saga Leia remembering Padme?

Lord Miggler, I didn't mean to come across as directly attacking you with any of my most recent posts, and I apologize.

 

Likewise ;-)

 

Kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy, isn't it? It's only "irrelevant" to those for whom explanations get in the way of declaring plot holes. If you redo an experiment under different conditions or variables you're not guaranteed the same outcome; that's simply how things work. But this misguided implication that circumstances are somehow irrelevant? In what universe, real or fictional, has that ever been true?

 

Luke now being a fully trained Jedi and in full control of his abilities is as likely or if not more to view these visions if that is indeed what they are. Yoda's description is pretty vague at best when viewing the past, and there are no other instances of viewing the past throughout the entire saga. As for triggers, that seems to be a notion completely of your own making and not one I've ever heard throughout the PT and OT. If anything viewing past or future is done by meditation and/or focusing the mind, or in Anakin's case through dreams. Leia doesn't speak of anything of sort, she speaks of memories and describes them to Luke.

As written and viewed prior to the PT creation it's pretty clear the intent was that Leia knew and remembered her mother if only "a little" and was "very young" not newborn, yes they are "images, feelings" but that's what memory's are. Luke asked because he didn't know her and didn't have them, and at this point he is fully capable of viewing the future (Dagobah) so therefore we can assume the past as well, and is very much more capable than Leia.

The PT changes this by killing Padme at birth, thus creating an inconsistency that contradicts what we already know and have been told. The reason being because it created a bigger plot hole having Padme alive with Anakins child after spending the last two movies establishing Anakin had an obsessive attachment and love for Padme, one that eventually forced him to the dark side, to put it simply he would have never let her go.

You can derive all the explanations you want from throughout the saga, it doesn't change the fact that the story was changed from what was originally intended, accidentally or on purpose it doesn't really matter it created an inconsistency and a gap in the story therefore a plot hole. Just because you choose to explain it through other means doesn't change this, I choose not to because implying that a character is alive at a certain point then killing her when we arrive there is too much of an inconsistency to overlook with force visions, triggers etc etc

 

^ This part, despite being an unnecessary history lesson that absolutely no one disputed, is true.

...but this part isn't. One is not synonymous with the other.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the fate of Padme in the PT was a right choice. The idea of her handing Luke over to the Lars and keeping Leia strikes me as WRONG. If Padme had survived the childbirth, I could see her giving up both twins, keeping both of them until her death, or simply dying right after their births.

But keeping Leia and giving Luke away? If that is what Lucas was hinting in ROTJ, it was a bad choice to make.

And to dismiss Leia's very vague memories of Padme as a consequence of the Force, and yet accept other aspects of the Saga that has to do with the Force strikes me as hypocritical. You want to accept the Force being connected to some aspects of the story, but not other parts of the narrative? This doesn't strike me as fans being logical. This strikes me as an example of fans being selective over what they want to believe and what they don't want to believe.

 

Agreed.

Yes, Padme's fate is a retcon, but it's a retcon that works within the context of how the Force is described and depicted in the majority of the Saga, and to pretend otherwise is just an example of people complaining for the sake of complaining and creating issues where there are none.

 

The change being right or wrong has nothing to do with it.

It's not hypocritical at all it's just other aspects are believable based on what we know and have learned and the other isn't. Like I said at face value prior to PT the scene can be understandably construed as Leia knew, interacted with and therefore had memories of her mother even remembering how beautiful she looked.

From what we have seen in the PT and OT every vision that someone experiences is of the future and is of people that have a they a relationship with, a strong connection or bond built up over time and made stronger through experiencing things together i.e Luke with Han and Leia, Anakin his mother and Padme, Yoda's explanation which is pretty vague even says "faces you will see, old friends long gone" that implies of a connection beyond the comprehension of a newborn baby. Padme dies at their birth that bond/connection was never created, and if there was one it's certainly not one that a baby could comprehend.

So for me idea of Leia having visions of when she was a baby is not plausible especially when she only met her mother for 2 mins and the whole experience is beyond the mental comprehension and capacity of a newborn child.

 

According to who?

This is irrelevant in light of Lucas retconning things in RotS.

That's the crux of the issue right there. You're dismissing things because you don't think they make sense even though there's no reason - within the context of what we know about the Force and how it works as described and depicted - to do so.

 

I'm sorry but the idea of retcon especially from the movies which are meant to be absolute canon is something that just doesn't sit right with me, regardless of the explanations. It smacks of ignorance and/or lazy writing on GL's part.

There's certainly no opinions being changed so I will end it here, it's been an interesting debate I will say that. Being new to the forums it's not something I have ever discussed in depth before so apologies if it sounds like I'm flogging a dead horse ;-)

 

Flogging dead horses is just what internet discussion forums were made for. Be thankful that the Smell-O-Vision app is still in development - the pit of dead horses from the Saga forum alone is currently twice the size of Texas, and rather pungent.
I'm pretty sure that the putrefied corpse of the stallion named 'Hayden Christensen vs Sebastian Shaw as Anakin's Force Ghost' would fall apart if you tried to drag it out.

 

I know. I didn't mean it like that Welcome to the boards!

 

Maybe Lucas even likes plot holes.

They're like body holes. They're kinda fun.

 

Thank you I am glad to be here.

One off topic question: What are points?

 

This isn't a dating site. Take it to PM.

 

Points?

 

On the top right of the forum page under my profile it says:
Messages
Likes
Points

 

No, but, kidding aside...

How can you have plots without holes?

In Star Wars, holes provide refuge, allowing time for safety and recuperation.

For instance:

Han takes the Millennium Falcon within a crater within an asteroid in TESB (there just happens to be a creature lurking there).

Luke technically lives, a bit hobbit-like, with his aunt and his uncle, in a hole in the ground, for his early formative years.

It's through exploiting a small hole that Luke later blows up the Death Star.

And so on.

Holes have their part to play.

They allow us to get inside the mechanism, to break apart the weave, to burrow our interpretations inside of.

I think it's important -- if not unavoidable -- that all great stories have a few gaps. We need to understand their imperfect nature and finish them with our imagination.

 

I'll be honest, I've no idea. Doesn't appear in my browser. Maybe ask in the Communications forum - I suspect it might relate to games or contests in other forums.

 

Some problems here.
Luke grows up on the same planet his father is from, Leia grows up on a different planet from where her mother is from.
Luke has people that lived with his grandmother for a while and knows his father a little. He also has Obi-Wan around and Luke has clearly met him several times.
Leia is raised by Bail, who knew her mother, if anyone else knew her is not clear.
Luke is curious about his father and wants to know about him. Leia apparently have little to no interest in her real parents. Also Luke grows up without a "father" and "mother" but Leia called Bail "father" and presumably she called Bail's wife "mother." So again she would be far less interested in her real parents. In short, Luke has as much if not more reason to have "Force visions" of Anakin.
Anakin has visions of Shmi and later Padme, both are people he thinks a lot about. Luke did think of is father but still he got no visions of him. And after ESB, Luke would be filled with questions about if what Vader said is true or not. And yet as far as we know, he still gets no visions of Anakin.
So your "trigger" theory doesn't really work for me.

Also "doubtlessly knew of Padmé's life and work "? If Leia knows of Padme and her life. Then she would also know when Padme died. However then she would know that her mother died in childbirth so Leia would KNOW that she never spent anytime with her mother. So any "memories" of that would be confusing. Also, RotJ, established that she knew when her mother died but if she knew that this was at birth then she would have said that. "When I was very young." and "When I was born." are different enough to warrant a mention.
In short, from what RotJ says it seems that Leia does know when her mother died but that it was not at birth. With the PT I think it unlikely that she knew anything much about Padme. Bail would want to keep that info hidden as not to place her in danger or risk her saying anything. So he probably lied to her about Padme and when she died.

The Force allows you to "see" the past, present or future. It doesn't "give" you memories.
Luke saw the future involving Han and Leia so his memory is that, of a vision of the future.
He didn't have "memories" of going to cloud city or being there with Han and Leia.
Luke could presumably get "visions" of his grandmother's life on Tatooine. But that doesn't mean he has memories of living with his grandmother, the memories would be just that of visions or dreams.

Leia clearly says she has memories of her mother, what she looked like and how she was like to HER. That bit tends to be ignored in these discussions. Leia said her mother was kind, meaning how she was like to her. That indicate far more than just having "visions" of Padme's life in general or being able to remember her own birth in total detail. That suggest that her mother was kind to her.

And the "Force" explanation differs, some argue that Leia is only able to remember the time she actually spent with Padme, ie her birth. And since Anakin wasn't there, that is why neither Luke nor Leia "remember" him. Others argue that Padme is able to "see" all of Padme's life essentially. When Padme was a girl, growing up, during the war, getting married to Anakin etc.
The two are quite different.

In closing, "the Force did it." explanation doesn't work for me because it is a made up explanation and one that isn't applied consistently. Leia has memories she shouldn't have, so the Force is used to provide them. But then you must make up an additional explanation as to why Luke doesn't remember.
Given all the similarities between the two, twins, born from the same woman, both strong in the Force etc. A far simpler explanation is that Bail told Leia about her mother, showed her photos and films and that made Leia think that she actually knew her mother.

Finally, what purpose is now served by these lines? We know that neither Luke nor Leia ever knew Padme or have any real memories of them. That Leia thinks she does is only because the Force has fooled her into thinking that she spent time with her mother. Or she fooled herself by misinterpreting her dreams.

Bye for now.
The Guarding Dark

 

One of the movies retconned one of the earlier movies.

This has happened before.

 

Stories are art. They require interpretation.

The perception of "plot holes" runs along similar lines.

 

Good writing?