I have seen "Dead Poet's Society" dozens of times, so rather than tell you my feelings about it I think I will pose a number of questions. Feel free to pick up on any one of them -- or more than one. Or, if you are moved, ask and answer your own questions. I will number the questions for your convenience.
1) Nwanda -- punk or hero?
2) Is the suicide glorified in any way? Or do we as readers see that Neil has options and therefore the suicide is seen as rash and misguided?
3) Is the movie, taken as a whole, more celebration or indictment of the carpe diem philosophy espoused by Keating, Whitman, Thoreau, etc.? In the end you have a suicide, a firing, and an expulsion; but you also have self-empowerment (Todd), love (Knox), and a whole bunch of teenagers who are thinking more independently than they were before.
4) Even if we can agree that Keating isn't responsible for Neil's death, does he do anything wrong? Is he blameless?
5) Fun symbolism Department. Birds. At the beginning there is a montage scene of huge flocks of birds rising and turning all together (they're wrens, in case you were wondering). Then there is an immediate cut to the kids going down the circular stairway all together (first day of school), the same directional flow as the birds in the previous shot, bringing out the "flock mentality" of the kids. Later, Knox rides his bike through a huge flock of Canada geese on his way to see Kris jump into the arms of Chet. Upsetting the flock! Also, two scenes of kids walking in the courtyard provide bookend symbols in the movie. First you have Keating encouraging his students to walk to the pace of their own drummer (a Thoreau line!) with the Latin teacher watching from the teacher's lounge above; then, at the end, you have the Latin teacher with his students in the courtyard, walking in unison, reciting something they have memorized, following already made footprints in the snow, with Keating watching from the teacher's lounge above (they wave to one another). If the style of walking is an indication, it's back to normal now in the school.
More later, but this should get you started.
1) Nwanda was the heroic punk of the story, because he was the only one that refused to sign the sheet of paper and didn't care what the consequences of his actions were, while still committing acts of stupidity. Nwanda took Carpe Diem to the extreme by being disrespectful and rebellious, but he remained true to himself and his beliefs.
ReplyDelete2) I don't believe that Neil's suicide was glorified in any way, because it wasn't a political or social statement-it was simply an act that was brought upon by severe depression. I think that maybe the movie should have touched more on Neil's depression so that his suicide wouldn't seem so sudden, because it did seem like an extremely rash decision.
3) The movie was meant to inhibit both the good and bad implications of Carpe Diem: good being the release from "personal shackles" and bad being getting involved in drugs, alcohol, and acting recklessly. Yes, all the boys, with the exception of Charlie, in the Dead Poets Society developed a new-found confidence in themselves and their wants, but they were unprepared for how it would affect them. Had Nwanda been thinking straight, he would have posted the article or faked the phonecall from God; instead, he chose to Carpe Diem himself all the way to the Headmaster's office. Neil decided to defy his father instead of standing up to him and telling him how he felt about acting, which got him into more trouble and led to his suicide.
4) I don't believe that Keating should have to take the blame for anything, because none of it is his fault. He vocalized his disappointment in the reckless occurrences that took place after the DPS was recreated, which shows that he didn't want any of the bad things that occurred to happen. All Mr. Keating did was show the boys that they no longer had to hide who they really were, they could still be successful even if they didn't live up to the expectations of others. He told them to think for themselves, not what to think. Most of the boys were already so accustomed to being told "no" that they forgot how to say it themselves. Mr. Keating simply brought out what was bottled up inside those boys.
5) I hadn't noticed the flock of birds that had been shown in the beginning, but I did see how everything at the school was obviously routine. The boys all dressed the same, walked the same pace, and worked tirelessly to make their parents proud. It is sad seeing how all of the work that Keating had put in to try to make the boys walk to their own drummer was being undone by an old-fashioned bigot. Also, the way the boys were walking at the end was very professional and boring and didn't show the usual youthful pep that is normally found in a teenager's walk. It was quite depressing.
1) I am split on the idea whether Nwanda is the Hero or the Punk of the story. He can easily be seen as the punk because like Maya said, because he did not sign the sheet of paper and was expelled. He did not have to sign that sheet of paper like the other boys did because Mr. Keating was already going to be fired. Because Nwanda signed the paper, he is a transcendentalist hero like Thoreau. If Emerson is Mr. Keating who spreads his ideas and theories, Nwanda is Thoreau who took these theories and put them into actions.
ReplyDelete2) Neil’s suicide was portrayed in the movie as sudden and almost stupid, anything but glorified. To us, the viewers, his suicide looks like a random act that was unnecessary and did not need to happen. To Neil on the other hand it seemed as if he had no other options but to kill himself. He did not want to go to military school and he thought that there was no escaping his dads tyranny. The viewers could easily see a different out rather than suicide, which would be to run away or wait out his time in the military school and then act as he wish.
3&4) The movie ended, and it felt as if there was something unfinished because I was hoping for everything to be happy and nice, but instead there was a suicide, firing and expulsion. These all came as a surprise to me because we had only learned really about the positive of carpe diem, but these ideas can cause some pretty terrible things if taken in the wrong way, or taken to a certain extent. The movie showed mostly the negative implications of cape diem, but with the addition to the ending where they all stand on their desks it really shows that this idea of seizing the day can be a good thing. The boys that stood up all stayed in school and followed the rules, but they were much more self aware and aware of the things in life that they could achieve after they leave the school. Mr. Keating did in fact open the boy’s eyes to the ideas of carpe diem but he should not be blamed for the suicide of Neil. Neil’s dad is the one that should be blamed for putting so much pressure on him. The other boys that stood up are a symbol of the good that Mr. Keating did by introducing these boys to carpe diem.
To start i would like to ask why maya and caroline did all the questions, that was a waste of time.
ReplyDeleteAny way, Nwanda's charectar can be seen as a both a punk and a hero. As far as the punk part, it was charlie who brought the girls to the cave, and the alcohal. He also simply acted like an idiot the whole time, like with the whole phone call incident. He thought that this stupid act would help impress MR. Keating but the fact is that it didnt. Mr. Keating gave him a life lesson saying that he needs to choose when to be rebelious and when to be safe. As far as him being a hero, he definitly is. When he chooses not to sign the paper it is like he is the marter for DPS. He could be compared to a christ like figure, except for the fact that he didnt have to "DIE".
Notice, too, Maya, how they are walking in other people's footprints ... I really don't think the film glorifies the suicide at all; but I think Neil does somewhat. Putting the thorny crown on and all -- it almost seems like he thinks this is the ultimate romantic act. As viewers, we see it as tragic, and tragically misguided. And, yeah, Caroline: it's odd to have a film be a celebration of and cautionary tale against the same idea. But I think that's what it is.
ReplyDeleteI am a huge fan of this movie! I think it was really well done and has a great message.
ReplyDelete1. I think Nwanda (Charlie), though rebellious, was more of a hero than a punk in this story. He refused to conform to the school's rules and would not step into the metaphorical jail (as presented by transcendentalists). I think he represented Thoreau's ideas, like Caroline said, because he would not comply to basic laws set by the school. The main example is when he "gets a call from God" during the assembly. Though many of his peers and Mr. Keating thought this to be foolish, it just further illustrated his transcendentalist mindset. I think he interprets 'carpe diem' a little bit differently than the rest of the boys in the Dead Poets' Society - he decides to break away from the strict rules forced onto him (by the school, his parents, etc). I think that Nwanda is more of a hero in the story because he really takes 'carpe diem' to heart and is most like Thoreau when he refuses to conform to society's regulations and laws.
3. I think that the movie advocates the idea of 'carpe diem.' It shows the ways that the different boys understand and interpret it (Todd finds his voice, Knox finds love, etc). Even though it doesn't turn out best for Neil and Nwanda, Mr. Keating's introduction of this new idea - an idea to go against what you are being told, not to conform to society's norms - sparks a new fire and passion in the boys and this is a positive change. Rather than being rule-following robots (or in Mr. Harrington's words, a bean-counting conformist), the boys' eyes are opened to a way of life where they don't have to do everything that the authority figures in their life tell them.
4. I don't believe Keating is responsible for Neil's death like he is blamed to be. The argument could be made that if he had not been a the boys' teacher then they wouldn't have heard/learned about the Dead Poets' Society, they wouldn't have learned the idea of 'carpe diem,' and eventually not have taken rash courses of action. However I think that Keating's arrival at the school was extremely important - he challenged traditional ways of thinking, living, and teaching, and helped his students think independently. We can't say whether Neil would have committed suicide or not without Mr. Keating's presence, but I personally think that Neil's passion for acting would have caused him to resist his father either way and driven him to whatever action lay in the future for him. I think that Keating is pretty blameless in this situation, and is more of a hero (especially emphasized in the last scene) than a "villain" in the movie.
Seriously a great movie!
4) Even if we can agree that Keating isn't responsible for Neil's death, does he do anything wrong? Is he blameless?
ReplyDeleteFrom the way I saw the movie, Keating held no blame in Neil's death. Keating was simply encouraging Neil to express himself and to "seize the day." Everytime we get behind the wheel of a car, people's lives get put at risk. But we have to realize that if someone decides to walk in front of your car while your driving 65, you probably weren't the cause of their death. Keating was simply trying to inspire his students. He had no way of knowing that Neil would get suicide from Carpe Diem. In 1983, a 20-year-old Canadian man named James Jollimore claimed that the Ozzy Osbourne song "Bark at the Moon" compelled him to stab a woman and her 2 sons to death. Ozzy Osbourne responded that the next thing he would be blamed with was the AIDS virus. This incident came to mind when thinking about Keating taking the blame.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1.) Like Caroline, I am also some what indecisive on whether Nwanda is a punk or a hero. He may be more of a punk than a hero, but there is definitely a little of both. Nwanda is portrayed as the class clown or the trouble maker at Welton. He can be seen as a punk from the academic and in-class point of view. He does take Mr. Keating's encouragement of "Carpe Diem" a little too far during the school assembly. But shortly afterwards, Keating explains the difference between stupidity and seizing the day (a big message of the story). However, from the outside of class point of view, I think he could be seen as a hero or a perhaps a role model to a certain extent. He proves himself loyal to Mr. Keating, and puts the others before him self. Nwanda may have been seen as a punk, but he is a prime example of a loyal and honest person.( Also, I don't think he was ever genuinely mean to any one through out the movie.) In this case, he was neither ceasing the day nor being stupid. Nwanda was simply being loyal, and being a "Thoreau" and standing up for his colleagues and what he thought was right.
ReplyDelete4.) I don't think Keating should be blamed for the death of Neil. Keating never said to him directly "kill yourself" or "die". He also never encouraged him to "stick it to the man!". In fact, he told Neil to talk to his parents and to sort both of his and his parents interests out. Also, even though Keating had encouraged his students to be free thinkers and their own persons, influences can only go so far. (Besides, I think his teachings should be ones that should be desired at an academy like Welton). Keating simply just preached the idea of living life's aspects to their greatest potential, which Neil did. Other than Knox, I think Neil was the only one to used the concept of Carpe Diem correctly. However, I do think that killing himself because his father didn't want him to act was definitely irrational. He had options open, and I don't think he was as trapped as he might of thought he was. I guess in this case he was really siezing his day.
FOUR
ReplyDeleteI believe that Keating was somewhat to blame because he opened their eyes to the simple good things in life in a society where truly living is looked down upon. The boys almost had reminded me of monks when they were sneaking off to the cave in their hoods. Like the monks the boys had adenial of self and leaning to control the passions through ascetic discipline before the met Keating. The boys leave “the monastery” where the passions are forced to remain in check. They must flee their school in order to pursue their unruly passions. Mr. Keating plays the part of the wise spiritual director and corrects them when he has knowledge of them going overboard. He tries to teach them through their failings how to be wise. So he is to blame for giving them the choice to make their lives extraordinary with reasons to live before they all feel trapped like Todd.
Also about NEILS DEATH
ReplyDeleteI believe his life was an act – to his father, to Keating, even to himself, but when he wasn’t acting, he thought he had nothing to contribute – he was just as lost as Todd was when Todd first came to Welton. Neil couldn’t deal with the idea that to give up acting was to quit playing the roles that he lived everyday, and so he killed himself because he “realized that he had not lived” up to that point. I can’t think of any justification for calling Neil a martyr when the only thing he stood for was an act – an illusion – in itself. I think that could be interpreted to mean that Neil wanted to be someone else – a person who could express his passions when the time was appropriate.
I believe that Keating is basically blameless when it comes to the resposibility for Neil's death. Like Arianna said, Keating only encouraged Neil to talk to his parents about his interests. While I think everyone agrees that he didn't have a part to play in Neils suicide, but he did play a role in the boys movement towards a level of independance, which one can argue was the origional cause of the tragedy. Ultimaltly though, Ispiring the boys was Keating's job. He did it very well and showed the boys that there was a life they could choose to live besides that ruled by their parents decisions. There was no way for him to forsee Neils suicide, so my opinion remains that Keating was completely blameless in Neil's suicide.
ReplyDelete1. I believe that Nwarnda was a mixture of a punk and a hero. He had good intentions, but he didn't know his limits. He took the phrase Carpe Diem the wrong way. He seemed to use it as an excuse to do stupid reckless things when in reality it meant don't live behind your fear of failure.
ReplyDelete2. When I watched the suicide scene, I did not think that it was glorified in any manner. It was portrayed more as an act of stupidity and recklessness rather then the right decision. He should have thought through all of his other options before acting on killing himself.
PS this is grace. I don't know why its showing my name as unknown
3. Overall, I think that Carpe Diem is portrayed as something that like everything in this world, it good to a certain point. Although you should let people walk all over you and just let your life be lived for you, you also shouldn't take those kind of risks like Neil did, that didn't save his life, but ended it.
4. I don't believe that Kienien should be blamed for Neil's death. Although he personally might feel some slight guilt for encouraging Neil to stand up to his parents, the school had no right to put any of the blame on him. It's his job as a teacher to teach his students how to think for themselves. If they cannot think for themselves, how are they expected to take care of themselves once they are on their own. It's his job to guide them down the right path and he was doing just that, the boys just took his advice the wrong way.
Nwanda was a punk. He rebelled just like a punk should and the only way you can argue he is a hero is by saying he was the biggest punk of all of the other punks except for the fact that they weren't all punks they were just rebels. i believe a hero brings change in a positive way. All nwanda does is rebel against the school, he publishes the article in specific. The article is clearly unsuccessful at bringing girls to the school and all it really does is make D.P.S public. In fact if Nwanda wasn't such a punk the maybe the D.P.S wouldn't have been discovered and mr. keating wouldn't be as guilty as the latin teacher makes him out to be. Nwanda never does anything to help he just fights the flow of society and thats all hel ever do. He is a stupid punk. Adam B has a good point however by him not signing the paper but im pretty sure he was expelled before he could of signed it or you could argue that he was just resisting the flow of society.
ReplyDelete1. Nwanda was a total punk, but is one you also can't help but like. He is relatable in the sense that if I went to an all girl's boarding school that was as plain jane and straight lines, no color as Wellington (I think that's what the school was called?), than I would probably try and get kicked out myself. But he does so in a way that is rebellious and "punk-like" So overall, I'd say Nwanda is a punk, but I also would probably hang out with him.
ReplyDeleteThe suicide is not glorified, and I don't think Neil only did it because he felt trapped. I think he felt that killing himself was the sole way to show his father that he wasn't going to conform to his father's future for him. Yes, he could've run away, but chances are, his father would have found him. I mean, let's be serious. It was snowing out and it kind of looked like he lived in a cottage in the middle of the woods, where is he going to go that's safe? He could've died trying to run or he could've just stopped everything himself. I think Neil wanted to run away and have a future of his own, but I think he was too scared of not being in control. And in the last moment, when he's sitting at the desk, although an impulsive decision, he feels completly in control and total power over his life, something he has never felt before because of his father. I don't think Keating did anything wrong, but he definitely sparked the thought process and living style that the boys, especially Neil, had never thought about or heard of. The idea of controlling your own future, living out what you love to do, and creating your own beat. Keating planted the seed of romanticism and to an extent, fed it and provided it growth, but he never encouraged lying or bad character. He cannot be blamed for Neil's death, but I think it's appropriate that he is held somewhat responsible.
Unfortunately, I was absent on the day when we finished the movie, but it sounds like it took a pretty dark turn with the suicide and the "martyrdom" and what-not. So instead of trying to answer any of the questions, I'll examine what aspects of the school itself might have helped cause these incidents to happen.
ReplyDeleteThe first thing that comes to mind is school's practice of corporal punishment. As soon as the headmaster, with the wiffled wooden paddle in his hand, tells Nwanda to "assume the position" by bending over backwards, one has to assume that getting spanked by an old man with a paddle has to have a profound psychological on anyone that is subjected to it.
The school itself has a rather oppressive nature to it. With its gothic pillars, arched hallways, and bricked-limestone walls, one gets the feeling of strict tradition combined with cold repression. The students themselves become part of this atmosphere, dutifully following what is expected of them. (With the Exception of Nwanda.)