Still Good in Palpatine?

Nope. There was no good left in Palpatine just plain black clouds of evil. Nothing else. He's created a facade - a deceptive front. So chances are he is evil all the way to his heart.

 

I'm sure I am not sure at all.

 

palpatine is a master mind not a mass killer...he kills who he has to not who he wants to...he has good in him...but he uses it in differnt ways.....

 

He is good in his own point of view. A lot similar to Hitler for example. Look at him, he said he was doing something good.

 

Mandragora:

Ah, we meet again.

First of all: Myths and archetypes aren't something separate from life on this planet, with nothing at all to do with it. Myth and its archetypes were constructed by humanity in order to help people deal with and understand life. They started out as tools to help people live.

One way to look at this topic is to evaluate the result of the mindsets that the two approaches suggest. If everyone went around thinking this way ("You are pure evil and there is nothing good about you") about those they consider their enemies, what would happen?

If everyone applied the mindset Luke uses toward Vader in conflicts with others, what would be the result?

 

Lucas just wanted us to see that even when things are black and white, there are shades of grays everywhere. We saw the Empire as evil and the Republic/Alliance as good. ROTS showed us that while that axiom is still true, there's also another point of view. That good can be seen as evil and that evil can be seen as good. It's important to understand this when we see Anakin become Vader and how the Sith generally operate, from their own twisted point of view. To the Sith, the ends justify the means. The Jedi lacked the vision and the fortitude to do what was necessary, the Sith didn't. But the Jedi know that what the Sith do is wrong. It not only goes against the Jedi Code, but it goes against the will of the Force.

 

Palps didn't have a valid point when he told Anakin that good was a point of view. It was just more sidestepping of the issue and the Sith coming out in him. Anakin was just naive and willing to listen to it since it fit his needs at the time. You think Palps would have pulled that crap with Obi-wan? Pffffff... It allowed Anakin to justify things in his mind. If he could have just stepped back and thought for a moment, he would have seen that his emotional attachments were bad. The Sith were bad. The Jedi and the code was good, whether it met his selfish desires at the time or not.


$$

 

nope...never good in Palpatine? I don't think so. Look who took over the Galaxy

 

Still Good in Palpatine?

Hell no!!! he's totaly evil! Look at what he did to poor Jedi, to Anakin & Padme, to all of the Galaxy... he's evil!

 

An evil person never knows that they are evil. They think they are good. Palpatine was trying to do good for the galaxy, until power corrupted him. OR, he was after power his entire life so that things could go his way. His way to him IS good.

Darth Vader is the only one that understands that what he is doing is evil. So he naturally reverts to good.

 

"As we have seen, acts against others take place in the context of backwardness. I believe that most people who act in oppressive ways, consciously or unconsciously, are trying to meet a particular need that overrides their good intentions. Misdirected, they have sought to meet this need in extraordinarily destructive ways, even while unaware of the need itself. Ultimately, destructive behaviors never succeed in fulfilling the need. As a result, we are witness to cycles of destruction."

"Commonly, people who are beside themselves try to take control of what's 'out there' in any way they can. They've lost their inner connection, so they try to get a grip on something, anything -- even someone."

--Patricia Evans, in Controlling People.

 

Good in Palpatine? Is this when he tricked Anakin into doing his dirty work or when he betrayed all the Separitists by murdering them as enemies of his Empire?
Maybe, at the end of his life, when he tried to force Luke into killing his own father. Maybe. I guess it would have served some sort of purpose, probably good...
I guess this belongs in this forum because of his fight with Yoda. He showed true jubilance making Yoda struggle for his life. I don't know if it was Yoda personally, or his Jedi-hood, but Palpatine really seemed to lose himself.

If Sith should rule, then Palpatine is good, the best; that was his only intention, his only passion. There is no instant at all, within the movies, that his singular motive(s) can be denied.

 

Anyone completely evil or completely good would be a complete bore.
This simplicity of say, Superman, isn't exactly compelling.
The fact that Palpatine says "good is a point of view" shows
you that he believes what he is doing serves some purpose.
If the galaxy wasn't already corrupt, he wouldn't have
been able to userp power as he did.
Palpatine probably doesn't congratulate himself in
the mirror about how evil he is in the morning
like some sort of dark daily affirmation, he
most likely feels like he is doing what he feels he must
to bring order to the galaxy.
Napoleon, sans the force, did much the same thing, and was
if not loved, at least respected by his people
because they'd been starving and civil warring man.
And that's a drag.

 

I remain unconvinced by arguments like this one:

Palps would sell his own offspring for spare cash for the vending machine and never give it a second thought.

He was always the sadistic manipulative SOB he is in the PT. Like I said, when he was born he probably killed his own mother by electrocuting her with force lightning. If there's a single being who is the embodiment of all evil, he's it.

And it works that way. There can't still be good in Palpatine because there never was any good to begin with.

To him, raping infants and sticking kittens in the microwave on high for 10 minutes is taking it easy.

Bad to the Bone.

Until we graduate from this kind of thinking, there will never be peace on Earth.

that kind of thinking describes palpatine just the way he is

 

CZRA,

interesting take on palpatine. i feel that palpatine is evil, incarnate. the darkside made physical. sure he may have good intentions, but those intentions benefit only himself, not anyone else. like you said he may not get up and congratulate himself every morning on how evil he is, but i am pretty certain that he could care less about innocent lives. or who and how he kills his next victim, or how many lives he's ruined through an ever expanding slave trade.

he is evil, the darkside incarnate. darth sidious lord of the sith.

just my opinion

superman not interesting? huh? superman is the most recognizable superhero in the world, the most popular, best selling, and the most powerful (and let me tell you, I HATE that about the guy)but he is superman, so i really don't see how he isn't compelling.

there's something comforting about reading a story about superman, you feel so gung ho america, and "superman can do anything and beat anyone." gotta love it.

 

"Remember: Only the Sith deal in absolutes!"

There's another saying, that this line prompts. It goes something like "that sounds like the pot calling the kettle black".

Jedi deal in absolutes all the time. A Master and Padawan Learner is a simple example of that. A simple example that transcends between Jedi and Dark Jedi alike. oh well

Isurus the White

 

In a nutshell, theres a thin line between the path of the dark side as opposed to the light side. Having said that, the Sith seek power for personal gain vs. power for the benefit of good and peace (Jedi).

 

In my work I have often referred to Hitler and Stalin as graphic examples of the effects cruelty to children can have on society at large. In response, many people countered by saying that they had often been beaten themselves and that had not made war criminals out of them. Asked in more detail about their early years, they invariably disclosed that there had been at least one person who had shown them honesty, affection, or love, even though that person had not been able to protect them from mistreatment. This type of figure (I use the term "helping witness") can also be found in the biography of Dostoyevsky, who by all accounts had an extremely violent father but a loving mother. She passed on to her son the knowledge that such a thing as love actually exists, a knowledge without which his novels would have been unthinkable.

But what is hatred? As I see it, it is a possible consequence of the rage and despair that connot be consciously felt by a child who has been neglected and maltreated even before he or she has learned to speak. As long as the anger directed at a parent or other first caregiver remains unconscious or disavowed, it cannot be dissipated. It can be taken out only on oneself or stand-ins, on scapegoats such as one's own children or alleged enemies. The variety of hatred that masquerades as righteous ideological zeal is particularly dangerous because its imperviousness to moral categories makes it unassailable. Sympathetic observation of the cries of an infant brings home forcibly to the onlooker how intense the feelings involved must be. The hatred can finally work as a life-saving defense against the life-threatening powerlessness.

--Alice Miller, Paths of Life

I.e., people who act like Palpatine do this not because they woke up one morning and decided to get some perverse joy out of hurting as many people as possible, but because on a very deep, primal level, they are scared, and this behavior is their best attempt at salving a deep, primal need to feel safe and invulnerable. I think everyone can see that this is precisely what Vader does. In his case, everybody gets it, but nobody can seem to move up a level and realize that what happened to him is the cause of any fall ot the "dark side" that befalls any human being. We seem to need so deeply to hate, that not only are we incapable of generalizing this important theme of these movies, but when someone proposes to do so, we resist the very idea with all our might.

Why do people need so badly to have someone to hate? Someone whose humanity doesn't matter -- doesn't even exist! Someone who provides that disposable bit of human flotsam that it's OK to kill and not give a second thought about?? I look around, and despite the constant claim that "this is myth, this isn't reality," we are all treating each other that way in real life.

Which is why this attitude scares me so much, and makes me really afraid for the future of human society on Earth. If we can't even get our minds around this idea in the case of a fictional character, in a myth, in the most popular film series ever, created partially to get this truth behind our eyes and in our minds, what hope does humanity have to alter the miserable course it's on?

I realize I'm speaking to the deaf here, but what the hell.

It's true that in most of his quotes about Palpatine, GL toes the standard line about ultimate evil, blah, blah, blah. However, when asked about the ORIGIN of the Sith and how they are treated, his response sounds very much like the above. I believe that GL understands that a Palpatine is just a human being who has been very cruelly treated, that the character IS a person just like you and me and not some monster creation of evil, and that when asked specifically about that, he does say this.

I, however, am not in possession of the original quote. It was from one of those big magazine interviews, Time or Vanity Fair or someplace like that.

It's interesting to me that people can key up all the "ultim

 

Yeah, i've seen a lot of GL quotes - even about the origin of the Sith, but none seem to even hint at Palpatine being a "victim" of any sort. Seriously, there's a reason why the story doesn't bat an eye at it's constant struggle to have Palpatine killed - and that's for the reason Mandragora and others have already stated, that PalpaSidious isn't to be looked at as a reallife person, just like Yoda isn't supposed to be looked at as a reallife person.

 

The only quote about Palpatine that Lucas has said, is that he is convinced that he is doing good by creating the Empire and turning Anakin. But Lucas to my knowledge, has never said that Palpatine is that kind of good person. Ian McDiarmid said that he tired to find anything redeeming in Palpatine and couldn't. Only that he has one moment of genuine concern and that's after Anakin's been burnt and battered. Much of the text LLL posted fits with Anakin and with Maul. Maul, officially, was conditioned to become evil and hate filled. Hence his eyes are yellow full time, without reverting back and forth or like Sidious after the fight with Mace. Anakin had the capacity for hate, but it came out over time. Even when shown love by Obi-wan, Padme and Shmi, he still becomes hate filled thanks to Palpatine. Now, Anakin isn't beaten like Dostoyevsky, but he is conditioned to hate. Hate through words and beliefs, rather than physical means.

All Lucas ever said about Palpatine is that he's like the devil himself. Just as Yoda's seen as a god. They're more like the archtypes of good and evil representations of the gods and devils.

 

I'm still contemplating my opinion on all this, but...

If Lucas said that Palpatine/Sidious is like the Devil himself, we must consider that the Devil is a fallen Angel.


Having worked professionally with "Controlling People" and their Victims (as defined above); I can confirm that these folks actions are seeded in their own fears and insecurities.

Anyway, this is too broad of a generalization. Somehow, this characterization doesn't ring true to Palpatine.

Palpatine's methods of influence and control are of a different type.
He appeares supremely self-confident and never "out of control".
His Grand Design took meticulous planning, extreme patience, and his actions are deliberate.

 

This was mentioned by IMD, and therefore he referred to Sidious being worse than the devil. "... the pure exercise of power is what he's all about. That's the only thing he's interested in and the only thing that can satisfy him, which makes him completely fascinating to play, because it is an evil soul. He is more evil than the devil. At least Satan fell; he has a history, and it's one of revenge." (IMD)

I think Satan is not quite the correct case of comparison for Palpatine (as God isn't for Yoda, since Yoda isn't the creator archetype).

I've mentioned that here quite a few times. The Alice Miller works referred to by LLL not only describe how people become "evil", but also the kind of personality that is common to such people. They are slaves to their own psychological pressures. In essense they are unstable, insecure persons, suffering from depressions or phobia, and tending lose control and to emotionally break down under stress. That's why they seek out psychotherapy in the first place. None of these traits are ever exhibited by Palpatine.

From what I've heard, Palpatine backstories have been declared off limits for the EU (same as Yoda backstories) - and I think there is a reason to it; possibly because there is no past that plays a part in the characters' traits as they are by the time of the Saga.

If there is anything to understand psychologically about Palpatine, LaVey, rather than Miller, and in particular the part on deliberate self-transformation ("creating one's ideal Self from deliberately invoked forms" - meaning, he has deliberately created his ideal self "Darth Sidious" that has completely replaced whoever "Palpatine" once was) would be a good point to start with, I think. I wouldn't describe LaVey's approach as "evil" in the sense Palpatine is, but there are a lot of philosophical parallels and the adoption of a "holy name" (or rather, unholy name in this case), "Darth Sidious", points to LayVey's deliberate self-transformation of one's own personality.

 

Thanks mandragora, will ponder on this further...

Anyway, I found the original source of that quote for you here:

In a January 24, 2002 Star Wars Insider interview, McDiarmid compared Palpatine's character to that of Shakespeare's Iago, the villain in the play Othello:

"Everything he does is an act of pure hypocrisy, and that's interesting to play. I suppose it's rather like playing Iago. All the characters in the play?including Othello until the end?think that 'Honest Iago' is a decent guy doing his job, and he's quite liked. But at the same time there's a tremendous evil subconscious in operation. There's a moment in one scene of the new film where tears almost appear in his eye. These are crocodile tears, but for all those in the movie, and perhaps watching the movie itself, they'll see he is apparently moved?and of course, he is. He can just do it. He can, as it were, turn it on. And I suppose for him, it's also a bit of a turnon; the pure exercise of power is what he's all about. That's the only thing he's interested in and the only thing that can satisfy him, which makes him completely fascinating to play, because it is an evil soul. He is more evil than the devil. At least Satan fell; he has a history, and it's one of revenge."

Interesting analogy to another "two-faced" utterly unredeeming character.

 

in my opinion palpatine is a very misunderstood person, he is portrayed as this evil controlitive pycho who only kills 4 his personal evil sadistic gain when acuallly he is a super genius that wants galactic peace and will do anything 2 acheive it but unfortunatly the jedi r the real corrupt 1's that want 2 keep the ways of old wich prevent galatic peace and then they go off and form a rebelian and if that had'nt have happend then the force would'nt have gone out of balance and luke would'nt need 2 kill his father, and when he was trying 2 bring luke 2 the darkside really he was trying 2 fufill the profacey and that peace would riegn over the galaxy. also if the rebelian had'nt had formed anikan would be the chossen 1, as u can c thr r many canidates luke, his sister, and thier father. so in conclusion u can planly c that the emperoer is not evil thats just jedi( and film directer) interperitation.