Sweaty-toothed madman

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.

Cannonballs?

I was just reading through "Self-Reliance" for about the hundredth time and paused on this sequence:

It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own; but the great man is he who in the midst of the crowd keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude.

If we can forgive the sexist language (I'm sure you noticed how Emerson associates brave nonconformity with masculinity and mindless conformity with femininity), perhaps we can take a minute to appreciate this three part statement. If nothing else it is a perfect lesson in how to use the semicolon, the most under appreciated of punctuation marks.

No, seriously, I like what he says here, because it puts into words something I've felt before. Living how the world expects you to live is relatively easy. If you know how to pick up basic social cues, it is easy enough act in ways that bring us into the protected fold of society. It is also easy, when isolated, to make thoughtful decisions about the kind of person you want to be. You can close your bedroom door and make your own personal mission statement and accompanying lists of values, virtues, and resolves (like Ben Franklin). But as soon as you take that list -- and those very individualistic notions -- out into the world, you start to feel the brute power of social expectation. Truly courageous people stand up to this tidal wave of expectation, dig their feet in mud, and insist upon their own visions of themselves. To use the language of the guy from this morning's assembly, courageous people are the ones who stand up. I'm not talking about rebellion per se, or even Rosa Parks type determination -- just the simple courage to be exactly the person you are or want to be. If you decide that most gossip is mean-spirited and hurtful, then have the courage to say something your catty friends -- or even walk away. Sometimes, in order to be true to yourself, you have to say things that create the kind of awkwardness in conversations that everyone seems to want to avoid at all costs. Later in the piece, Emerson suggests that we should speak our words as "hard as cannonballs," the exact opposite advice given to us by our good friend Ben Franklin. Cannonballs, of course, can sink ships, but in the end to have enough moral nerve to stand by an unpopular viewpoint can bring the kind of "perfect sweetness" that he mentions. Sweet!

Saucy and Provoking

So the question for this first entry is, what do you think of Benjamin Franklin's "project for moral perfection"? Henry David Thoreau, a writer in our near future, once said, "I know of no more encouraging fact than the unquestionable ability of man to elevate himself through conscious endeavor." What do you think of this sentiment? Should we always be pushing to improve ourselves, to make ourselves into the persons that we hope to be? Or should we relax, accept ourselves the way we are, and go about the business of living our lives? Walt Whitman, perhaps the polar opposite of Franklin, says, "I exist as I am, that is enough." What do you think?

test post

Here is a test post, period 8. what what what?