Ophelia & Padme & Jane

That connection I brought up a couple weeks ago between Ophelia and Padme has been brewing up some additional thoughts.

Ophelia, so in love with her Hamlet that she died a watery grave for him. Padme, so in love with her Anakin that she died at his very hand. Jane, so in love with her Rochester that . . . wait a second, Jane didn't die for Rochester, did she? Nope, Bertha did that for her.

Bertha is, of course, Jane: she is Jane if Jane had stayed. Yes, Jane and Rochester get the happy ending that both Ophelia/Hamlet and Padme/Anakin miss out on--but not right away. Sometimes things take time.

One of the things I loved about Southwest Shakespeare's production of Hamlet a couple years back was that it set Ophelia up as someone who also felt and thought deeply the way that Hamlet did--and that was why she was a good match for him, someone who loved him and was loved by him. So Ophelia shares in Hamlet's tragedy--because they're part of each other.

I also love that look Padme has at the end of Episode II when she's just married Anakin. It isn't that "I'm so happy" look; it's like she knows that this isn't going as she had pictured but she doesn't mind because she's chosen it, anyway. Sure, Padme was getting to that point in her life where she wanted a relationship and family--but she didn't picture that this would involve sneaking around with a secret, forbidden marriage. Yet she chooses the double life, anyway, because she decides that she wants it.

And Jane? Jane chose Rochester--and then she beheld Bertha and she high-tailed it out of Thornfield. Jane's story is a story about independence, so Jane could not, in terms of the story, value her relationship with Rochester over herself. She only returns to him when she can be with him on equal terms. So Jane does not have the tragic end of Ophelia and Padme. But does this mean that Ophelia and Padme failed where Jane did not? Well, maybe not quite so simple as that.

Okay, maybe Hamlet was ignoring Ophelia. But for how long? Not that long--and he was, well, quite distracted by the death of his father and deciding whether or not to kill his uncle for revenge or justice. So in theory, if Ophelia hadn't died and Hamlet hadn't died, then Hamlet probably would have been able to return to Ophelia after he was done killing his uncle. And Padme, well, Padme's an odd one. I mean, what if Padme hadn't died? What if she had gone into hiding? What if, years later, she heard about Anakin's redemption? I think that would have made her glad. And I don't think, if she had survived, she would have regretted being with him. You can't regret the choices that another person makes because you have no control over that. When she chose Anakin, he was a good person--and when he changed, she told him that she could no longer follow the path he had chosen. So Padme did choose, like Jane, to leave--except that it was already too late for Padme.

Is there a name for the heroines that accompany Byronic heroes? (No one describes Hamlet as a Byronic hero, right? But you can kind of put him in that light, at least in the context of what I'm here describing.) Nah, people are too concerned about Ophelia going mad and suicidal or Padme seeming weak or superficial (even though she isn't if you actually look at her character) or even with Jane's mistake being her going back to Rochester. But where is the focus on their positive characteristics in terms of these relationships? Just because something ends tragically, does that mean everything about it was tragic?

Ah, well, you know, I did write my thesis on Jane Eyre. Too bad I didn't have this character trio in mind at the time--I could write a paper on this concept, too. In fact, I'm partly tempted to: I just keep wanting to start all these different writing projects right now. And I miss Jane, my buddy I keep wanting to return to. Maybe if I'm not finding the time to reread Jane Eyre right now, I should at least find a spare four hours to watch the film version (2006 is the best).

In the Queen's Shadow

You know, I never feel like I share the experiences of people who talk about the role models that Star Wars characters were to them while growing up. Except that, the more I think about it, the more I think that Padme might just have influenced me more than I realize. After all, I was about eight when I watched The Phantom Menace and we watched that movie quite a bit in my house--being that we didn't own too many movies and being that it is, after all, a good movie (not perfect, sure, but few movies are). One of the great things about it is the introduction of two great Star Wars female characters (a topic which is talked about so much for characters coming out now): Padme and Shmi Skywalker.

While I must reluctantly admit that there will probably never be a book about Shmi, at last we got a book, Queen's Shadow, about Padme. A book written by E.K. Johnston, no less. How exciting is that?

I keep talking about reading or watching things at either the right or wrong time in one's life. When I was maybe a third in, I thought maybe this was a bad time to be reading this book--for reasons I won't get into. But then the reasons changed and developed and it became quite a fitting time.

The title refers to two things. There is the plot. Padme is shifting from her role as queen to senator and adjusting her approach accordingly. What worked when she was queen doesn't when she's senator, so she has to get out of that shadow even while using what she gained from it. There is also Sabe, her closest handmaiden (and her main body double aka. Keira Knightley in the movie). Much of the book is from Sabe's point of view, not just Padme's. So you have this character who is freely choosing to live behind this other person, to literally become her when needed: she is living in the queen's shadow.

The book answers many questions--or rather fills in many details. The shift from Padme in Episode I to Episode II (why does she act so different?). The elaborate costumes. The handmaidens. Simply Padme's voice in it all. The movies show what they can, but they're not from Padme's perspective, so I think a lot is left to the audience to infer--and some audiences maybe don't quite bother to go into her perspective. So this book shows what types of things go through her head.

It's so funny. I'm going from realizing that maybe this character did influence me to realizing that we have much in common. Not . . . everything about her. Just certain things, certain things that reading this book made me ponder. And I guess this was kind of a pondering book. It wasn't so much about plot as about that transition that Padme made to being a senator. So it has all of the thoughts she has about her past, present, and future. While politics make up a certain percentage of the plot, E.K. Johnston has that talent to bring everything right back to character. It was all about the characters and not about the political plot points. Interestingly, as well, this book shows Padme apart from Anakin, during the time that she didn't seem him at all and so only thought of him rarely and in passing if at all. That's quite important. Much as I like Anakin and Padme, all this shows that she was her own person before their relationship. It makes her eventually "fall" more a tragedy that happened to her than something she brought on herself.

If Padme didn't bring the fall on herself, even if it did come, maybe I won't, either.