PT Why didnt Padme save Shmi from Slavery ?

We have Watto's comment at least "Believe it or not, I heard he later freed her and married her. Can you beat that?"

This was exactly how it was handled in the Legends novel Tatooine Ghost - Leia, 4 years after ROTJ, finds Shmi's diary, and reads it.

 

Thanks for the info. I haven't read Tatoonie Ghost, but feel like I saw this as what happened when AotC came out. Maybe it appeared in a shorter form in the Star Wars Insider or Attack of the Clones Visual Dictionary. I never thought of Shmi being bought first and married second.

 

Yep, but before that he said he sold Shmi to Lars. If Watto said that later he freed & married her that makes it even worse. So for a time Shmi was Cliegg's slave!

Which even back when Lucas was in charge was not considered movie-level canon. This is something that should've been briefly mentioned in AotC. As the movies stand now, Cliegg was an owner of slaves. Also major queries arise over any slave-owner who marries one of their slaves. Ie how much did the prospect of gaining freedom play in the slaves' decision to marry.

Lucas should've had Watto say "A farmer called Lars met your mother & wanted to free her. He paid me to set her free, & I hear that later he even married her!"

 

One does not simply free a life long slave. What is Padme going to do, hand her a few thousand credits and send her on her way? She'd be robbed and sold back into slavery in no time. Padme wouldn't just have to free her, she'd have to take complete responsibility for her, and where does that end? And like others have said, why just Shmi? Why not everyone else? Then what, is she going to be responsible for all of them too?

The reason Padme doesn't free Shmi is because it isn't her responsibility to do so.

 

What a grateful & charitable attitude. Have you read through this thread?

 

It seems like reality to me. Do you know how many starving children I could feed with what I spend in a weekend on alcohol? More than I'd care to consider. Am I now an awful person? What makes Padme's situation different? What if I was saved by some starving family, and they sheltered me for a couple days. I could easily feed them for the rest of my life. Does failing to do so label me ungrateful and uncharitable? Absolutely not.

 

If one of those starving children helped save your life & you did nothing in return, hell yes you'd be an awful person.

Again, have you read through this thread? Bcs answering this line of argument would be repetitive. It's based on the thoughtless miserable premise of "if I can't help everyone I should help no one". To follow this ethos means that no charitable act would ever be undertaken. Even towards a person who personally showed you kindness & generosity. Which itself went against that mean-spirited ideal. Notice that Shmi didn't have her house full of the poor & desperate folk of Mos Espa? Yet she took in Padme etc. I guess that makes her a bad person

 

First, Shmi wasn't a life long slave, she was sold into slavery when Anakin was three.
Second, Shmi got some money from Anakin after they sold the pod. Was he or Qui-Gon concerned with her getting robbed? The film doesn't imply that.
Three, getting sold back into slavery. Are people regularly attacked and sold as slaves on Tatooine?
Again the film does not imply this.

Cliegg freed her and she was not was sold back into slavery. Nor was Cliegg or any of his family attacked in such a way.

So sorry, your scenario does not hold water.

As for why, Padme owed Shmi thanks.
Shmi helped her when Padme was in dire need.
Returning the favor would be the decent thing to do.
Padme also owed Anakin thanks and she knew he missed his mother.
So again helping Shmi would be a thank you to Anakin.

What she would do?
Again Shmi had some money from the pod, not enough to buy her freedom but some.
So Padme arranges for her freedom and then she can offer that Shmi come with her to Naboo and help her get a house and a new life there.
If Shmi prefers to stay and make her own way, that is up to her.

As to the other slaves.
Why do people keep making this and either/or.
Padme can help Shmi as a personal thank you and deal with the larger issue by for ex bring it to the attention of the senate and suggest that they try to apply some political pressure to deal with this.
It might not work but she can at least try.
As far as the films go, she just forgot about Shmi and the rest of the slaves.
I don't see that as more moral.

No it isn't. This is something you assume will happen in order to justify your argument.
You keep thinking that this is a zero sum game. That the number of slaves is always constant.
It isn't quite this simple.

Watto sold Shmi and from what AotC showed, it didn't look that he got a new slave.
He was seriously in debt after TPM so he likely sold her to pay off what he owed.
So he probably could not buy a new slave even if he wanted to.

Did the people he owed money to, buy more slaves?
As I've said, we can't answer that as we don't know who they are.
So as far as the films goes, the end result was one less slave.

Bye for now.
The Guarding Dark

 

That premise is completely foreign to my line of thinking. It's not a mere "charitable act." It's taking complete responsiblity for another human being. I'm sure in the land of naivety, that special place of sunshine lolipops and rainbows, being a saint is as easy extolling their virtues online. In reality, it's a little harder to play Mother Teresa.

It seems to me this is what Lucas wanted us talking about by not freeing Padme. With his billions I'm sure it's weighed heavily on his mind what good he could do in the world. Wanting to take responsbility for masses, as he could, probably was tempting. But he chose to help in his own way, even if it probably didn't profoundly affect as many lives. I suppose I find it hypocritical for us to chastise Padme for her failure, when each of us could be blamed for a similar action.

 

It would be the easiest thing in the world for a Queen of a wealthy planet to send a delegation to nearby Tatooine & arrange Shmi's freedom.

You keep skipping over the part where Shmi's assistance saved the Queen's mission to get to Coruscant. Then she donated her only son to the cause who saved Naboo. We would only be hypocrites if some poor person helped us to that degree & we didn't lift a finger in return.

 

First, alright.
Second, she was Watto's property and therefore his responsibility. From her lifestyle, I gathered she's allowed possessions which means as Watto's property she has certain rights.
Three. I don't know, are they not? That's usually how slavery works in fictional universes. If you're too weak to fend for yourself, you're a target. The word slave implies it.

Yes Clegg freed and married her. Did he hand her some cash and send her out on her own? No. He took the most responsibility one can take for another other than having children and married her. So, your comparison doesn't hold water.

Again, it's not simply returning a favor. It's taking responsibility for another's life. No small feat by my reckoning.

Why the other slaves? Because this is about ethics. Padme could free all of Anakin's friends as "easily" as Shmi. She doesn't because they haven't personally done anything to help her lately? Sounds pretty rotten to me

 

So you are pushing the ethos that if you can't help everyone you should help no-one?
Where was it established in the movie that Anakin's friends are slaves? Are the entire population of the city slaves? Aren't there some simple poor folk too?

 

It wouldn't be the "easiest thing in the world" for all of the reasons being discussed. In a bubble it makes sense. Not in reality. It would also be relatively easy to end world hunger. In a bubble.

Shmi never "donated" her son. She felt Anakin was getting a much better life, so from her point of view, she's being helped.

 

Again, "help." Taking personal responsibility for another living soul isn't merely helping them. You make it seem like she's not donating last year's wardrobe to the amity.

 

So you're saying Shmi hadn't done enough to deserve the Queen's help?
Maybe the problem is that you're evaluating this issue according to the Rules of Acquisition. It's true that there's no profit in Padme returning Shmi's help.

Shmi's son probably saved every living soul on Naboo. The Queen & her people only need to save one person in return. I'd say that's a good deal.

 

Haha! I do love me some rules of acquisition! But no, I'm not saying that. I'm merely suggesting that freeing one from slavery is tantamount in this scenario to adpoting a child. Is there any greater responsibility? I just can't see this being a reasonable suggestion with the aforementioned being considered. Padme helped Anakin through some of the roughest times of his life. She provided him warmth during a cold time. Sounds a little like quid pro quo to me.

 

She had no rights, she is a slave.
Watto likely didn't see the need to treat her horribly but he could sell her to someone that could.
This is one thing you overlook, she is a slave and can at anytime be sold to some that does any matter of horrible things to her.
You say that she can get robbed or such things.
You forget that she can get sold to Jabba, who feeds her to the Rancor or some equally horrible thing.

As for where the slaves come from. Slaves can come from wars of conquest. The soldiers invade a city or country and takes the people that live there as slaves.
Or people that can't pay their debts are sold into slavery.
Or new slaves come from the children of slaves.
That regular people are just attacked and sold as slaves, that is not all that common.
And had that been the case, would people even dare to visit Tatooine?
They could get attacked and sold as slaves at any point.
Tatooine is a rough place and quite dangerous.
This?
The film doesn't imply it.

Your argument takes things to extremes.
You talk like if you save someone from drowning, you are responsible to take them through college.
Or if you save a woman from getting raped, you have to marry her.

Shmi had money and a house and some skills.
Padme can free her and then simply offer to take her off planet or if she wants to stay and live her own life.
Shmi is a grown woman, not a child.

As for Ciegg, he freed her and then married her.
So what if she turned down the offer?
Or what if they divorced later?
Shmi would then be a free person and Cliegg would not be responsible for her.
And yet he did free her.

Except it is.
You just make ridiculous exaggerations that are baseless.
Qi-Gon tried to free Shmi as well?
Why?
Did he plan to marry her?
Or provide for her the rest of his life?
He tried to free her because it is the decent thing to do.
And because he knew that it would help Anakin.

It would be more like, a friend helps you move. And a few months later, he wants your help to help him move.
If you tell him no and give this reasoning. "If I help you move, then I have to help anyone move and I won't do that.
Would this friend like this answer?

[/QUOTE]

Are Ankin's friends also slaves?
Is that established in the film?
They could be regular people.

And what is more rotten, help zero people or try to help some?
Ex, a doctor has ten wounded soldiers that are dying, but he can save five of them.
Is it more moral to let all ten die as opposed to save five of them?

This argument that you if you can't help everyone, then you should help no one.
That is not moral. That is more an excuse to not act.
And thankfully, doctors, cops and a lot of people don't follow this negative viewpoint.
They try to help, even knowing they might not be able to help everyone.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

Not really since Shmi is an intelligent fully capable adult. Who can look after herself & had done for years.

 

She has no rights? And you scold me for what is and isn't implied? Tsk tsk. Of course she has some form of rights. Whether they are merely Watto's rights as slave owner over her or whatever, I don't know. She has property, she has possessions, she has credits. If she had no rights she couldn't have these things as they would simply be taken from her.

Actually, weak people being sold into slavery is quite common, not just in fiction, but in reality. A woman with no family, no friends, and lots of credits, would be robbed and enslaved. Especially in a setting as scummy and villanous as Tatooine. And people don't "visit" Tatooine. You make it sound like a family getaway. It's implied to be a criminal's paradise, owned by a criminal overlord. It attracts dangerous people. Dangerous people don't make good slaves, if they can even be enslaved to begin with.

Shmi had a house? You just said she had no rights. How can she own a home? I think it's implied that it is Watto's domecile and she merely inhabits it. Why is this implied? Because she's a slave. So she has some credits. That's all. Ten minutes alone on Tatooine without the rights of protection granted to her as a slave of Watto's and she's already robbed on homeless. Grown woman yes. What does that have to do with anything?

And what about Clegg? What's your point? Didn't they fall in love then he freed her? So what then?

"Ridiculous exaggerations that are baseless." Baseless if completely ignorant of all recorded history and most fictional tropes that are based on said history.

What is happening here is merely a difference of opinion of what would happen to Shmi after being freed. I'm stating she would need a lot of help getting on her feet, to such a degree she would be considered a child. By this I mean Padme would have to provide room, board, transporation off Tatooione, find her work, etc, etc. And it would never end. A year later Shmi find herself in worse conditions than on Tatooine? It's Padme's responsibility. This is what I don't think you're getting. You speak of helping others but your idea of help is naive. You can't help people on the level that Shmi would require. At the very least, you can't ask or expect someone else to do it, and you CERTAINLY can't preeach about morality. As I've stated, we all could help so many people worse off than ourselves. Not helping it not moral.

I must have missed that film.

 

yeah I was going to say:

did I miss a scene where Shmi is described as unstable in some way?

This.

Out of all the people in the PT, Shmi seems the most level headed, and indeed the most sensible person in the GFFA. If I needed some sort of wisdom I'd go to her*

*Apart from Palpatine....but he's evil...so my choices are limited.

where on Earth did you get this idea from? there is absolutely nothing to suggest this, in fact...the opposite is implied

 

A major exaggeration. Padme is the Queen of Naboo. The other senior leaders of the planet, once they hear the story of Shmi & Anakin would be just as happy to help her out. Giving her a nice house on Naboo & a job she'd enjoy would be all they'd need to do. Or, if she'd rather stay on Tatooine at least she can work & earn her own wage. Either way she gets the explosive implant removed.

Sounds like you're saying that helping Shmi would be too hard. Too much of a drag. Easier to just do nothing.

 

Shmi is a slave. If that doesn't make one mentally unstable on some level, I don't know what would. Shmi is level headed as a mother figure, because that's what she represents. She's the virgin mother, the perfect embodiment of the loving mother. Anyone who has been living as a slave for decades is going to regress massively. And it's not Shmi's character that makes this the case. It would be the same for practically anyone.

No, I'm just trying to be real. Like I agree with everything you're saying, my only point is that is not reality, either in the GFFA or here. We don't take responsibility for others, nor are we expected to. And no one can ask another to do so or expect it of them. If that were the case, we'd all be as "guilty" as Padme. It changes the fabric of our lives to an unfair degree, it asks too much. It sounds cold as ice, but it is what it is.

 

@Lost_Trekkie interesting perspective on the slavery thing. I disagree with you (in terms of Shmi at least) but interesting all the same.

 

What a bleak outlook. Nothing could've ever changed the fabric of Shmi's life more than letting Anakin leave her. Yet she did it all the same. Just as she let him risk his life in the race, simply bcs she felt he was meant to help Qui-Gon etc. Fortunately for him, & the Queen & her planet Shmi didn't share that self-centered attitude.

 

First, I don't know if you ar aware of this but a lot of your arguments sounds much like slave owners from the 18th and 19th century that opposed ending slavery.
One of their arguments was that slaves could not take care of themselves, they lacked the ability to fend for themselves so they were better off in the hands of their masters.

No she has no rights, that is what being a slave means.
Watto can, if he so chooses, take everything from her, even her clothes.
Force her to sleep in the gutter, eat whatever scraps she can find.
He chooses not to.
Not because she has any rights but because he is not totally heartless and partly because doing this for no reason is stupid and a waste of a resource.
She and Anakin had a house, that is shown in the film.
If that belonged to Watto or not is never said.
So it could be theirs or Watto's.

People DO visit Tatooine, remember the podrace?
People from all over the outer rim came there to watch it.
If Tatooine was this dangerous, that anyone could end up a slave if they go there, then people would not go there.
And the Hutts are gangsters but they want to attract business to their place. Having it be totally lawless, where people are shot down in the street or taken away to be sold as slaves, that is not in their best interest.
And the picture you paint is not one that we see. Anakin often walks home alone. A nine year old kid walks home alone. No one attacked him. He also took a lot of stuff back home from Watto, again he was never robbed.
Shmi and he had a house, it didn't seem like they had people breaking into it, raping her and stealing what ever they could find.

She did have a house as I've said. If it belonged to Watto or not is not made clear.
And if it did belong to Watto, given how much he lost in the race, Shmi could wind up in a bad situation.
Watto sells the house to get money and her as well to a gangster that makes her his sex slave. Or feeds her to his dogs.

And as I said, in tPM we see her get money, no hint that she would get robbed or some such.
If that was a risk, why was Anakin so happy over the money?
If what you describe is so common, he would be glum and figure that she would not be able to keep it for long.
No the film shows a very different picture than the one you want to poaint.

My point is he freed her and then asked if she would marry him.
She could have said no or their marriage could have ended and she would be on her own.
And yet he did free her.

And again, what about Qui-Gon he tried to free her. Was that wrong of him?
And he did free Anakin and he didn't know for sure that Anakin would go with him.
Suppose that Anakin elected to stay with his mother.
Was it wrong for Qui-Gon to free him?

Your version if things is baseless because it does not fit with what the film shows.
And historically speaking wars have been a big source of slaves.
As has people going to other countries and capturing people there.

[/QUOTE]

Again, you sound like those slave owners from 18th and 19th century.
"Slaves can not look after themselves, they are children, they need their masters."

The US did abolish slavery, did all of those freed slaves all curl up and die when they no longer had masters?
You are trying to make this a much bigger deal than it would be. And Padme is the leader of a whole planet and as such, this would take little effort on her behalf.
I am sure that Naboo would be happy to have Shmi live there and earn a living.
So it would be a matter of maybe 30 minutes for Padme to have someone arrange this.

Qui-Gon did free Anakin and tried to free Shmi. Cliegg did free Shmi.
hey certainly did not seem overwhelmed by all of these issues.

It is just excuses to justify inaction.
"Doing the right thing is too hard so I won't bother."'Great moral there.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface