Was Ani's slave implant a factor in Sids control of Vader?

It is a lie to get the children to behave. And how much more does Shmi want Anakin to be a safe little boy than a well-behaved little boy? She certainly would lie to protect him.

Didn't Yoda and Ben lie to Luke? Why?

The truth is revealed to children in small bits. They can't understand all of it coming out of the womb.

When Anakin is a boy, she tells him white lies so he won't run off before he can take care of himself. By the time Anakin is 16, she would have told him the real truth.

I do not believe Watto would blow up his slaves. He's a good guy.

And I don't see how blowing someone up out-of-sight is a good demonstration. If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

It's not outside the realm of possibility that Anakin heard the "blow you up" story from his friends.

The idea that Anakin is overly attached to his mother is your interpretation. There is nothing in the movies that leads me to believe his attachment to his mother was unhealthy or abnormal.

Lucas arguments may convince other people, but I always ignore them. It's my prerogative.

My argument is that there are always some people who overcome. I am sure there were some high-spirited, inventive, and brave slaves that escaped, not just lucky ones.

I think Anakin would have been one of the former type.

 

But she doesn't have to lie. She has no reason to. Hell, Watto could've just said it to his face.

Because he was not ready to understand what the Force was all about. Not to mention, Vader was dead as far as they knew.

You're assuming it's a lie and that Watto didn't tell them that they'd blow up if they try to escape.

Uh, a slave owner is never a good guy. Ever. No matter what.

No, but bringing back all identifiable body parts afterwards does.

Not really, because they weren't all slaves either. It could be that Watto told him that he'd blow him up, if he tried to escape.

It is for a Jedi. Attachment is bad for a Jedi. It is loving someone too much and letting fear and greed take ahold.

You can ignore all you want, it is what it is. Anakin was too attached to his mother. He loved her too much.

They were still lucky because they could've been captured and killed.

Except he would've been blown up for it.

 

I did not say she has to lie. I said that she would lie if she felt like she needed to, in order to protect Anakin. I said this in response to your assertion that parents never lie.

So Ben and Yoda will lie to protect Luke, but Shmi won't lie to protect Anakin?

When I saw the "blow you up" scene, I didn't believe Watto had actually implanted a bomb. I thought it was a lie that Shmi told to Anakin. It could have been a lie that Watto told Shmi. I said as much in one of my posts.

To say that "a slave owner is never a good guy" is an extremely biased and prejudicial remark. What you really mean to say is "I don't agree with the institution of slavery."

Here is your argument fixed: If you are a slave owner, then you will implant a bomb in your slaves, so that in the event that they escape, you can blow them up. There is no logical necessity in this statement.

And let's not forget that Lucas (your father) has presented Watto to us as a good guy, and not as an evil and cruel master.

Watto is all about money, not vengeance.

LOL. I didn't think of that. I still think blowing up slaves is a ridiculous and unnecessary practice, but whatever. I guess you win this small point.

It could be that he heard the story from his friends. It is possible. You know it. Come on. Admit it.

I say again "There is nothing in the movies that leads me to believe his attachment to his mother was unhealthy or abnormal."

Attachment is supposedly forbidden for a jedi, but it isn't really. It's a guideline to help you stay focused on your duty, not a rule. Attachments pervade the Jedi order.

I disagree with your assertion that he "constantly thought about his mother", that he never got over her death, and that everything that goes wrong with Anakin's life is because of his attachment to his mother. I just don't see it in the movies.

Luckily Almighty God has given me a brain, and my parents have given me some education, so I do not need Lucas to tell me what to think.

If the story Lucas has provided is food for thought, then let me eat it. I do not need Lucas to chew my food for me. I have teeth.

I guess chance is always involved, but it should not be the thing we consider first. Doing something and hoping you get lucky will fail 999 out of a 1000 times.

There are very few people who don't plan, who are dumb, who are lazy, and who are cowards that are very lucky in life.

Planning counts. Inventiveness counts. Courage counts. Strength counts.

If the implanted bomb story is true, then Anakin would have found a way to not blow up. That is just my opinion of what his character was.

You can keep thinking he is a wussy momma's boy that would have stayed a slave his whole life, because he didn't want to live without his mother's hugs, and that he could not overcome Watt

 

You make some very good points, wannasee.

Personally I doubt that there's an explosive in the slaves. All to easy for a rival worker to hack into and eliminate your competitor's staff. It does seem more like the sort of things Anakin and his mates would talk about.

But I think it's a bit silly to ignore what Lucas says. Yes, it's your right of course, but he is the guy who write the stuff

 

When I saw the "blow you up" scene, I didn't believe Watto had actually implanted a bomb. I thought it was a lie that Shmi told to Anakin. It could have been a lie that Watto told Shmi. I said as much in one of my p[/quote]

We don't know the nature behind the "bomb" unless it was explained somewhere more in depth in the EU. We don't know if the "blow you up" means that they were implanted with a bomb that the slave owner could remote detonate or if the tracking device was just a means by which a party could go out, hunt the slaves down and kill them if they didn't submit. I figure the tracking device, if not the bomb, was real as Anakin had changed hands between Gardulla and Watto and both of them would have had to have been very consistent in their lies to the slaves if they weren't telling the truth. I understand your point of Shmi lying to Anakin, but I think once freed, if no tracking device/bomb was addressed that Anakin would figure out that it didn't really exist and would tell his mother. Naturally it is illogical for a slave owner to want to blow up their own property; it's money down the drain. Nevertheless however, we see Jabba feed one of his slaves to the Rancor. We don't really know anything about Tatooine politics. If Anakin ran away and Watto turned to Jabba for justice I don't know how much Jabba would do to help; Watto might get stuck having to pay Jabba or hire a bounty hunter, in which case he'd lose a lot of money. Watto wasn't exactly incredibly wealthy. It may have indeed been cheaper just to destroy runaways and buy new ones; making an example of the old slaves such that no future slaves runaway. But then again, we don't exactly know who the "they" is, that is doing the "blowing up." It may not be the slave owner themselves. When slaves revolted in Haiti in the 1800s, many would be killed by law officials even though the slave owner himself probably wanted his slaves to be pardoned so that he doesn't lose money.

 

I don't know why this thread has become so complicated. What is the issue over whether or not parents tell lies? And why does it seem so hard to believe that slaves might have been implanted with tracking devices or a microscopic explosive device? It seemed very plausible when it was first mentioned 7 years ago in TPM.

Implanted tracking devices and bombs are simply control mechanisms designed to keep slaves in line. Someone mentioned something about blowing up their property, that that wouldn't be economical nor sensible. On the contrary, implanted bombs serve to preserve the institution itself. Yes, it may be that blowing up an implant, or in the case of Jurassic Park the "lycene" contingency, would cost the slaveowner, but wouldn't it be better for one to die than to risk losing many more? Examples are made all the time, and in all walks of life. A small explosive device implanted in the brain, spine, jugular or anywhere else and detonated would make the insubordinate or fugitive slave an example to all others.

Slaveowners would have the codes for each implant in each slave. It would be used as a form of identification and ownership. This isn't unusual, slaves and other forms of property have been branded, tattooed or scarred as signs of owndership. With the added microscopic explosive, slaveowners would also have the option to remote detonate any such implants should a slave become too incorigible, or tried to run away, or has run away. This is a form of deterrence, plain and simple. Why then does anyone think it is a lie told by parents? I don't understand where this line of reasoning came from.

 

No, what I mean is any man who owns another man is not a good person. No matter what.

There is all kinds of logic. You're setting an example to all other slaves the penalty for running away. Often times slave owners had to resort to killing, to set an example to the other slaves.

Watch the personal comments. As it Watto was not that good of a guy. No one is who owns slaves.

It's not about vengeance. It's about making an example out of anyone who tries to flee.

It is a rule as much as a guideline. That's why Obi-wan said that he would be kicked out of the Jedi Order, because he had developed an unhealthy attachment that would interfere with his duty.

That's because you need to look closer.

1. His fear of leaving his mother is what nearly prevented him from leaving Tatooine and what the Council senses while testing him.

2. Anakin has spent ten years thinking about two people in his life. His mom and Padme.

3. He has nightmares about Shmi's condition, which ultimately lead him to abandon his mission to go check her out.

4. His fear of loss is what drives him to leave Naboo, to leave the moisture farm and what leads to his killing the Tusken Raiders. Fear gives way to anger and hate.

5. He realizes with Shmi's death that he is not nearly as powerful as he'd like to believe. He also blames Obi-wan, when it is not Obi-wan's fault for his failures and for her death. Following her death, Anakin vows twice that he will become the most powerful Jedi ever. He cannot let go of this failure.

6. Anakin makes it clear to Padme that he will not let his failure with his mother be repeated with her. That the visions are much like what he saw with Shmi, three years earlier.

7. Anakin vowed that he would learn to stop people from dying, in response to his being unable to stop Shmi from dying. He turns to the dark side because he wants to stop people from dying. That is the ultimate form of attachment.

There is also the following in the eu.

1. While on a mission with the Jedi Knight A'Sharred Hett, who spent time among the Tuskens, was attacked by Anakin. When the fight ended, Anakin told Hett that he had only done that because the memories of his mother's death were haunting him during their time together.

2. During the mission to Praesitlyn, where he became a Knight, Anakin saw that one of the hostages looked like a younger version of his mother. When she hugged him, for a moment he felt as if he was reunited with Shmi. Then the woman was shot and killed by a Battle Droid, which enraged Anakin and he went on a bender like on Tatooine. He was only stopped by Qui-gon's voice, before he went too far.

 

When I first saw TPM, I did not believe that slaves would be blown up if they escaped. If there is no bomb, then how could Sidious use it to control Vader?

I explained that maybe Shmi told Anakin this story, so that he would understand why they could never leave. It is easier for a 9 year old to understand "he will blow us up" than the complicated story of why they are slaves and what that means.

Someone argued that my interpretation of this scene was invalid because a parent would never lie to their child. And I argued that parents do lie. That's the issue we were having. I was defending my interpretation of the scene.

I thought it was more likely that "blow you up" was either a story told by Shmi to Anakin, a story told by Watto to Shmi, or a superstition held by slaves in general.

Slaves are uneducated (for the most part, unless they are enslaved later in life). People who are uneducated and feel resentment make up stories about the objects of their resentment.

For example, have you ever heard that Jews drink the blood of children in religious ceremonies? Or that Black people don't love their children? Or a million other ridiculous stories that ignorant people tell each other about groups they don't like?

It is certainly plausible that slaves were implanted with bombs. If you take what Anakin says at face-value, then it is absolutely true. However, we needn't take things at face value, especially when your intuition is telling you not to. Keep in mind, that my interpretation of the scene is not at odds with anything in the movies.

If the implanted bomb story is true, then why doesn't Lucas show the bomb being removed? If there is no time to show the scene, then I think he would at least give someone a line like "hey, you don't have to worry about being blown up anymore."

Fear of a bomb is as good a deterrent as a real bomb. For example, the 9/11 hijackers had a fake bomb, but it was enough to scare the passengers into being passive (that's the popular story). Banks, grocery stores, and pedestrians have all been robbed with nothing but a concealed finger pointed at them.

Fear is used to control populations, just as much as force is.

No, what you mean to say is that you don't agree with the institution of slavery.

I cannot argue this point, since the statement is completely biased, and based only on prejudice. I have already pointed out the lack of logical necessity in the statement "If you own slaves, you will implant bombs in them." A discussion about whether slave-owners can be "good guys" or if they must be "bad guys" is irrelevant.

Hindsight is a beautiful thing. I wonder what kind of person you would have been, if your parents had owned slaves when you were growing up, and your neighbors did, and everyone had thought it was the most normal thing in the world.

 

Wannassee- It is certainly plausible that slaves were implanted with bombs. If you take what Anakin says at face-value, then it is absolutely true. However, we needn't take things at face value, especially when your intuition is telling you not to. Keep in mind, that my interpretation of the scene is not at odds with anything in the movies.

It is certainly not at odds with anything in the movies, but what do you think the odds are of telling stories about implanted bombs vs. actually having them is?

Wannassee- Fear of a bomb is as good a deterrent as a real bomb. For example, the 9/11 hijackers had a fake bomb, but it was enough to scare the passengers into being passive (that's the popular story). Banks, grocery stores, and pedestrians have all been robbed with nothing but a concealed finger pointed at them.

Except that, with the 9/11 hijackers, the fear factor based on a lie was a one time thing. With an established institution, I am sure there had to be a real demonstration. People, especially slaves, prisoners, children, etc. test limits. They probe for weaknesses. If there were no implants, only stories, I am sure it would have been tested and found not to be true.

If everyone that attempted a robbery with nothing more than a concealed finger, how long do you think that ruse would last? Fear is a good deterrent but it must be backed up with something real, not 100% of the time, but enough times to be credible.

Wannassee- Fear is used to control populations, just as much as force is.

Yes, fear of being blown up.

 

That's the kind of thing that is not necessary to move the story forward. Fact, Anakin is allowed to leave as he is free. Fact, Anakin is allowed into the Jedi Order where medicial facilities would remove the explosive surigcally. It's irrelevant beyond the dinner scene where it was brought up to explain the situation the Skywalkers are in. That was it's purpose. Lucas didn't include a lot of dialogue to state the obvious.

No, I know what I mean and I meant what I said. It's not prejudice to say a slave owner is good or not. It's a universal given except in societies where there are those who still enforce slavery and I highly doubt that they are good people. As it is, this isn't about me. We're talking about the story.

 

I have explained that I do not believe that Anakin had a bomb implanted in him. I believe it is a story that he heard from someone. I would not have posted if I didn't believe this.

It is true that once people discover there isn't any real threat, fear will not keep them in place. However, who, exactly, is going to test to see if they get blown up?

Until the time comes when someone is brave enough to try to escape, and gets a message back to the slaves, the story of implanted bombs will deter slaves from trying to escape.

Lies are more powerful than bombs, and they are less expensive.

There is no evidence for my interpretation other than what I have already provided in previous posts. It's all just my opinion.

It would not move the story forward, but it would tie up a loose end. If you are going to mention the bomb, then you have to mention the removal of the bomb. It's bad story-telling otherwise.

A line of dialogue would have been helpful. Whether or not the implant existed is not "obvious". Several people have posted saying that they did not believe the story of the bomb.

I think an actual bomb brings nothing to the story in the first place. What are we supposed to get from this? That slavery is bad? Lucas is a little late with that lesson.

You say slave owner= bad guy. I say "person who implants bomb"= bad guy.

I was talking about whether or not Watto would implant a bomb, and you attempted to contradict me by changing the subject. Of what relevance is your opinion of slave-owners in general, when we are talking specifically about the type of man that Watto is?

I thought you were trying to make the argument that since Watto owned a slave, he would necessarily implant a bomb, because all slave-owners are "not good guys". I pointed out that this argument was fallacious.

Your statement was not to the point, so I tried to make it to the point. Sorry.

I wasn't talking about you. I was talking about the statements you made. I wrote impersonally and then asked you what I thought was a thought-provoking question.

I don't think slave-owners are bad, and I have never owned a slave. I also don't think that I am the only one who thinks this way. There goes your theory about your own personal opinion being universal.

Just because an opinion is popular (anti-slavery) doesn't mean anything. Vanilla Ice used to be popular. Nazis were popular. The war in Iraq was popular.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

 

I never said it wasn't your opinion. But it is a fact within the films and the informational resources that the bomb existed and was later removed.

It doesn't matter if he is late or not, it is re-enforcing the concept that slavery is bad. And rather than showing Anakin shackled down, we see that he is shackled in another. That his life is endanger using advanced technology.

You miss the point all together. To own another human being is wrong and any person, especially those decended from slaves, would find statements that all slave owners weren't bad guys to be a very sad thing. To own a person is to take away not just their freedom, but their dignity by demeaning them. Degrading. My point was that Watto was not a good person. He did what he did because it was business. Even releasing Shmi was business since he couldn't afford to keep her.

 

That's what I always thought too. I figured it's one of those universal stories that probably isn't even true, or at least isn't true all the time. Someone somewhere may have used an implanted explosive, but I doubt it's a widespread thing. However, it still works as a deterrent because even if a slave were to think "hey, this whole bomb thing might not be real", it's not one of those things you're going to want to test in case your theory is wrong. It's probable that slaves still have implanted tracking devices, because that makes sense. Owners would want to keep tabs on their property. And it's not a terribly difficult leap from "hey, someone implanted this bit of metal under my skin" to "hey, this metal might blow up", especially if slaves were told that the implants tracked where they went.

 

Let me challenge you with this. What if someone did test to see if the explosive was real or not and found it wasn't. Then everyone runs off and disappears where they can't be found. Kinda ruins the whole idea of keeping a slave. Remember this is a technological universe here, where the latest in technology can be used for whatever purpose. If slavery was still ongoing like it was two centuries ago and they had the ability to either implant a bomb or strap it to a person, you don't think that slave owners wouldn't go for it?

I am reminded of the film, loosely based on the Stephan King short story, "The Running Man". Explosive collars were put on all the prisoners and should someone try to run, they would have only so far to get before the explosive went off when they crossed a motion sensor. This sensor would detect an escape and activate the bomb on principle. A similar idea was used in the Christopher Lambert film, "Fortress". There prisoners had a device implanted in their intestines which would cause severe pain, if they ever got out of line or tried to step past a line. Failure to behave would result in your guts exploding. So the idea of having explosives on one's person isn't that far fetched. Granted both films they were prisoners more than slaves, but the principle is still in place. It serves as a great deterrant (sp) to escaping.

There's also another factor. Should someone try to steal one's slave, they will get a nasty surprise in the form of an explosive.

 

But that doesn't address the opinion that the implant is a tracking device, and it's just kids "whimsy" that there is an explosive device. Kids have big imaginations. They may have been told it's a tracking device, but they choose to otherwise. It's what kids do.

When I was a kid, I was told not to go to a derelict house because it is unsafe. That didn't stop me and my friends coming up with all sorts of other stories about it, ranging from unexploded war bombs, to it being a hideaway for an escaped murderer.

Kids don't always believe what their parents say, and can easily come up with more far-fetched alternatives.

 

It wasn't like Anakin just said "they've put a bomb in us and if we escape they'll blow us up."

He was completing Shmi's sentence:

Shmi Skywalker: All slaves have a transmitter placed somewhere in their body.
Anakin: I've been working on a scanner to try and locate mine.
Shmi Skywalker: Any attempt to escape...
Anakin: And they blow you up! BOOM!

I don't think it was just something Anakin made up. It MAY have been something Shmi made up, but why continue to lie in front of the Jedi. Here these Jedi show up and take an interest in Anakin, and Shmi wants a better life for him. If the Jedi could sneak him off the planet why not do it? Why lie to the Jedi and tell him that slaves that try to escape will be "blown up?"

 

Besides, Qui-gon would sense if she was lying. He didn't.

Oh, and halibut, not every child was the same. When I was told not to do something, I did. No questions asked. And I did address the fact that it might not have been a child's whimsy, but Watto telling both Skywalkers the penalty for trying to run off. Just cause their is a possibility that it doesn't exist, doesn't mean that it doesn't. Watto has a valuable asset in Anakin. He cannot afford to lose him should they try to flee. And if he cannot keep them from running, then no one else can have what he has. It's not about vengeance. It's about business and greed. "If I cannot have you, no one can."

 

That section of my reply was to bookofkells, not you.

Way to go, George! Thanks for the lesson. I had almost forgotten. In the next movie, I hope he reinforces the importance of flossing.

I don't think I missed the point.

Duh. That's a quote from the post you are responding to. Do you still think I missed the point?

Also, if you read the post of mine that you quoted, you will see that you are repeating everything I said, although you are pretending that you are disagreeing with me.

My "sad statements" are not up for discussion. If you disagree with me, tell me why. Don't talk about how nobody agrees with me, because that is not a good argument. Did you read the link i posted for your benefit? Set a better example.

He was finishing her sentence, with his own thought. Shmi did not know that quigon was a jedi at the "blow you up" point in the movie, and the jedi had expressed no interest in Anakin.

There are a number of reasons why Shmi wouldn't correct Anakin.

It could be that she believes the story herself.

It could be that she allows Anakin to be a little kid and say stupid things.

It could be that she told Anakin the story herself, for his own benefit, so why would she contradict herself just because a tall guy, an alien, and a hot little girl came to her house during a sand storm?

Are you saying that the reason quigon didn't just steal Anakin and his mother from watto was because of the bomb?

LOL @ you reading quigon's mind. How do you know he didn't sense she was lying?

He is a guest in her house, and if she is lying, he wouldn't call her on it. He's a freaking guest!!!!

And just because there is a possibility that it does exist, doesn't mean that it does.

Haven't I been saying this all along?

There is more than one way to see things.

 

...Yes? You're right, she didn't know that Qui-Gon was a jedi at that point but she found out moments later and had quite a bit of time to talk to him afterward. Anakin and Shmi lived in a separate slave quarter, what would stop Qui-Gon from sneaking them out at night or something? And if Shmi believed it herself, you'd think Anakin would tell her that there isn't a bomb if it was never addressed when Watto granted him his freedom. I think the idea is that Qui-Gon couldn't just walk off with them if he wanted to. I remember there being a thread in the past about why didn't Qui-Gon do more to free Shmi, I think the answer there is that he couldn't. Watto wouldn't have it and he couldn't get her out underground railroad style either. It was impossible to because she was in physical danger if it was attempte

 

Is it perhaps time to agree to disagree on this point and move on?

 

I'm not sure about this. As Dark Lord suggests, the name of Vader may have become known in the GFFA between III and IV.
Certainly Leia knew about him. On the other hand, Luke didn't.
Also, while on Tatooine, Ben says nothing to Luke that would suggest that Vader died.
TESB implies that Yoda was "scrying out" from Dagobah, watching Luke.
It seems that the Jedi could have had a way of knowing through the Force whether the Chosen One was dead. In any event, there is always Qui-Gon.