Why didn't Qui-Gon just TAKE Shmi?

Discussion in 'Prequel Trilogy' started by Darth Valkyrus, Jun 10, 2013.

Moderators: SithStarSlayer
  1. Placeholder Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 30, 2013
    star 4
    It's not about making their Jedi happy, it's about doing the right thing. Clearly, they don't care. They got what they wanted!

    The truth is we were not meant to ask these questions. Because Lucas never thought of them
  2. JoshieHewls Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 16, 2013
    star 1
    Again, where does the right thing stop? Are they going to go to every planet outside of the Republic and free slaves? It's the right thing, right? Do it for one, do it for all.

    Couldn't it just be the case that that wasn't the story that we were to be told, but rather the story of Anakin Skywalker? Having a big sideplot of saving Shmi would detract from the story, anyway. I don't see why it's at any point of a discussion. It really is a non-issue.
    Jarren_Lee-Saber likes this.
  3. SithStarSlayer PT & SWTV Ntwadumela: he who greets with fire

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Oct 23, 2003
    star 6
    Hyperbole. The Jedi Order had no jurisdiction there; otherwise, Qui Gon would have freed all the slaves he came in contact with.


    You forget the Naboo. He saved their planet and they did nothing for the boy's mother. Long before anyone can rake the Jedi Order, every sentient that calls Naboo their home, should visit the coals first.

    How is that fact?[face_mischief]
    Jarren_Lee-Saber likes this.
  4. Placeholder Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 30, 2013
    star 4
    Padme is a scumbag too apparently.

    Sorry about your mom kid!
  5. Lars_Muul Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 2, 2000
    star 6
    It isn't a plot hole as much as it is a missed opportunity for a good plot point. It seems to me like the Jedi didn't do anything about it for two reasons:
    1. They didn't want to mess with things outside of their jurisdiction.
    2. They wanted Anakin to let go of his attachments.

    Does this mean that they are rigid, cold-hearted douche bags? To a certain extent, yes. You might say that they're intentions are ultimately good, but the way they go about this is hardly the preferable one. Anakin came to them with a strong attachment to his mother, who lives as a slave outside of the Republic, yet they treat him like they would any other padawan. They just cut him off from his old life because that's what they always do. They don't adapt to the special circumstances surrounding Anakin. Instead, they just try to make him fit into their old, rigid way of doing things.
    Anakin, in turn, seemingly accepts this. He could just flip 'em the bird and head back to free Shmi, but he chooses to stay with Obi-Wan. Why? My guess would be that he's too anxious to become a Jedi to give up on that dream. He is a bit greedy, after all.
    Whether or not that's true, though, there should be some level of resentment towards Obi-Wan and the rest of the Jedi because of this - and I think there is, be it conscious or subconscious. GL just didn't address the issue and that's a shame.

    Regarding Padmé's seeming indifference: She likely either assumed that the Jedi would take care of it or just chose to respect their methods of teaching.
    That's also something that could easily have been mentioned without changing the story one bit. Thus, it's not a plot hole.





    - I don't sleep well anymore.
    - Ooooh, how horrid!
    /LM
    Last edited by Lars_Muul, Jun 10, 2013
    anakinfansince1983 likes this.
  6. Team Padme Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 4
    This is an interesting topic. I guess Shmi couldn't just really go with them. I mean if she did what would she have done? Sit in the Jedi Temple all day?
  7. Iron_lord Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 5
    Sought out the family she was kidnapped from by those slavers, maybe.
  8. Sum-Wan Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 16, 2013
    star 2
    The whole Tatooine being part of the Hutt empire is a plot hole actually... think of it: The only Hutt in all six movies (Tatooine is featured in all of them) that we ever see is Jabba (with a "cameo" of another Hutt behind him in TPM during the Pod race). And yet, we are supposed to believe that Tattooine belongs to them (why would the population accept a ruler who isn't even their own species?). Jabba is like the king of the planet but he is also a gangster and it's only expected that he has plenty of enemies. His only power comes from a few inept Gamorrean guards and a band of mercenaries who could easily turn on him if someone else put a price on his head yet somehow that never happened. The whole gang infiltrated his palace trying to rescue Han which shows how easy of a target for his enemies he was. We never see a Hutt space patrol ship either. Spaceships come and go as they please and the empire conducted a raid on the planet without their permission.. That the Old Republic respected the sovereignty of the Hutts despite their ruthlessness and vulnerability seems illogical to me. It would be akin to the UN having allowed Saddam Hussein to remain in power.
    Last edited by Sum-Wan, Jun 10, 2013
  9. Placeholder Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 30, 2013
    star 4
    They own it in the way a mob boss owns a city. It's lawlessness, and the Hutt's are like the mob
    FRAGWAGON likes this.
  10. Placeholder Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 30, 2013
    star 4
    As opposed to being a slave all day, you would take that or just about anything else
  11. Sum-Wan Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 16, 2013
    star 2
    Not exactly lawlessness... they have their laws.. it is by law that slavery is legal, that they have their own currency, etc. The Hutts are the rulers of the planet, that's why there is a civilization there and not absolute chaos and permanent civil war. However they are ruthless which is why the Old Republic and particularly, the Jedi should have had no moral problem with taking one slave by force... or more.
  12. Placeholder Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 30, 2013
    star 4
    Most references in the films to the Hutt's rule is that they are gangsters. Which would make what I said correct. The mob has rules, John Gotti had rules. That doesn't make them legitimate
  13. Sum-Wan Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 16, 2013
    star 2
    They were legitimate enough that the Old Republic respected the sovereignty of their sector of the galaxy, though. That's why it's called Hutt space. Aside from the incursion to capture the Tantive IV and then to try and retrieve the droids on the surface, the Empire also allowed Tatooine to remain under Hutt control and, at least in the EU novels, Hutt space remains in the galaxy map after the Empire has been overthrown.

    Small correction: Tatooine doesn't show up in all 6 movies. It was absent in TESB. my bad.
    Last edited by Sum-Wan, Jun 10, 2013
  14. Placeholder Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 30, 2013
    star 4
    I don't think it has anything to do with people respecting the Hutt's sovereignty. I think it's an out of the way dump that nobody cares all that much about. And that is why the scum of the galaxy finds it an attractive place to be.

    When the empire wanted those droids, they put their troops on the ground quick and killed anyone they wanted to kill. They didn't ask permission.
    Last edited by Captain Tom Coughlin, Jun 10, 2013
  15. Reveen Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 4, 2012
    star 3
    They probably only respected the sovereignty for practical reasons of keeping organized crime centralized and because clearing out the Hutts would be gigantic hassle and waste of lives. Doesn't mean the Republic or Jedi should give their laws the time of day. Even if they do that doesn't mean they're not going to undermine the Hutts behind the scenes.

    This caveat is still hung up on the idea of slaves being property, and freeing one constitutes one person exerting their will on the slave's owner. Here's a neat idea, a Jedi can look a slave in the eye and ask if they want to be freed. That's something they can morally act on.
    Son of a Bith likes this.
  16. Sum-Wan Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 16, 2013
    star 2
    While the "being a dump" would apply to Tatooine, the same cannot be said about all the other planets in Hutt space, if the old republic / empire / new republic* didn't respect Hutt sovereignty why would they not care to take over Nal Hutta, for one? IMO, the old republic should have at least cared about Tatooine's slavery which was morally wrong. Another way to see the reason to why the scum of the galaxy gathered in Tatooine would be that it was a safe haven for them. With Hutts in power welcoming them being gangsters themselves. Not just because nobody ever cared to look there.
  17. BigAl6ft6 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 12, 2012
    star 4
    Erm, Qui-Gon tucking Shimi under his arm and running for the Queen's ship might have been a tad traumatic for little Annie by the time they got to the outskirts of Mos Espa her head would have exploded from Watto's slave implant, spewing Shimi brains all over the place. Like as in sending Anakin into a catatonic state for the rest of his life. She was fine where Qui-Gon left her. At least she was in one piece!
    Last edited by BigAl6ft6, Jun 10, 2013
    FRAGWAGON and JoshieHewls like this.
  18. Iron_lord Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 5
    I think the argument might have been "Qui-Gon should force Watto to deactivate the implant at lightsaber-point".
  19. DRush76 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 25, 2008
    star 4

    I can image the consequences that Qui-Gon would have paid for such an act.

    Despite the way she had died, Shmi had enjoyed freedom and love with Cliegg Lars for a good number of years. Please just give her that.



    Or she was too busy mopping up the mess from the Trade Federation invasion, ruling her planet and later, serving as senator to think about Shmi.
    Last edited by DRush76, Jun 10, 2013
    FRAGWAGON and Jarren_Lee-Saber like this.
  20. Alexrd Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 7, 2009
    star 5
    That's certainly not "perfectly right", and definitely not the "Jedi way".
    Last edited by Alexrd, Jun 11, 2013
    Jarren_Lee-Saber likes this.
  21. Placeholder Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 30, 2013
    star 4
    No, the Jedi way seems to be to endorse slavery. Shmi, the clones, they seem to just love slavery.

    I really am starting to see why the chosen one wiped them out, they might of had it coming
    Last edited by Captain Tom Coughlin, Jun 11, 2013
  22. Jarren_Lee-Saber Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 16, 2008
    star 4
    I'm singing Robot Chicken's "A certain point of view" every time I read one of Tom Coughlin's posts in this thread.
    Jedi loving slavery, LMAO!!
  23. Michael McKean Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jun 5, 2013
    star 1
    True, they couldn't buy her freedom there and then, but they could well have come back with the correct currency. Then again, if they had done so, it would beg the question: 'Why should the Jedi free and particular slave, if they free one slave then they might as well go on and save every slave. Why single out individuals?'
  24. Michael McKean Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jun 5, 2013
    star 1
    Yep, some would say you shouldn't steal even if the person you are stealing from attained the item by stealing. Its a classic Robin Hood situation: stealing from a rich man to feed the poor is still unacceptable.
  25. Michael McKean Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jun 5, 2013
    star 1
    I don't think Lucas totally portrayed the Jedi as the good guys in all the films. In Revenge of The Sith, just listen to what Palpatine says about them. And in the novel, Palpatine criticises their 'stealing' of babies in order to train them as Jedi, simply brandishing them from their parents.
    FRAGWAGON likes this.
Moderators: SithStarSlayer