I think that the reason why Neil grabbed Toddās poetry book and ran across the room with it in the no scene is because he felt like he was a little flustered and he felt that he was being too flirty and the conversation was getting a little too intimate, and so he impulsively took his book to be funny and almost undo the tension in the room on a whim
Something I noticed rewatching DPS that I feel like Iāve never really seen talked about before: when the Poets wake up Todd to let him know that Neil is dead, Cameron isnāt with them. He isnāt in that scene at all. Sure, maybe Charlie told him and he grieved privately in their room, but I honestly think he was an oversight and wasnāt alerted until later on.
I think this is one of the strongest explanations as to why he rats on Keating and goes so easily with authority: this is the final straw to make him feel like an outsider. As much as people like to say that Cameron is a rule follower through and through, I donāt think thatās the case. After all, he was the second person to officially join the Dead Poets Society behind Charlie.
I think Cameron has always looked for acceptance and structure, hence why he tends to be a teacherās pet. If he canāt make friends, then he can at least find his value in being a good student. But then Neil and Keating spark something in him, a want to be accepted not for just the rules he follows but for who he is. So he hesitantly breaks the rules he found comfort in, finds community with his friends, relaxes enough to joke with them and chant and rough house.
Of course there are the small comments Charlie in particular makes to alienate him, but heās finally doing it, heās finally becoming a part of the friend group and valued for who he is, even if it required Charlie becoming his roommate and breaking some rules to get it.
He bristles slightly when this guy, Todd, who so clearly doesnāt want to be involved gets accepted into the group with open arms. Cameron had to fight his way in tooth and nail, provide help for homework and force jokes where he saw the others would naturally, yet here comes this silent kid who begrudges everyone yet still has the same standing as him. But he brushes it off since theyāre all friends.
What serves as his breaking point is waking up the day after the play to sullen friends and tear stained faces to realize that Neil is dead, and not only that, but everyone has been told before him and have already processed it somewhat while heās still reeling. And the worst of it all is that they even told Todd before they thought to ever wake him up, the kid who, in his eyes, had just met the guy.
Neil was arguably the Poet Cameron was closest too, and with the betrayal of his delayed announcement on behalf of the others, he trusts no one now. Not only that, but he is scorned. Why do they get a say in who gets to know first? Why does the new kid get grounds to mourn more than him?
So he turns back to the constant which has never failed him other than making him albeit a bit hollow: authority. And in his young and betrayed mind, it becomes believable that this really was all Keatingās fault, that this weird and different authority figure who made them rip up textbooks had some kind of part in disrupting the normal he had gotten used to. And this way, he really believes heās getting justice for Neil while also saving all of the Poets from being expelled because despite the betrayal of being left behind, he still cares about them.
The pressed out cigarette is a symbol used twice in Dead Poets Society - both used to foreshadow Neilās fate
In the first scene, Charlie presses it out, right before Neilās father comes and scolds him for taking on the assistant editor role of the year, something his father didnāt want him doing. Neil gave it up.
In the second scene, his mother smoked the cigarette and pressed it into the ashtray, again, right before Neilās father gave Neil his last reason, his last scolding and their last conversation theyād have. Neil wanted to act- something his father didnāt want him doing. So he gave it up.
Charlie and Neilās mother both were very close to him, showing the importance of the people who still were incapable of stepping up against his father
The several cigarettes in the second scene show the significance and weight of the following end, maybe foreshadowing slightly
In the background we can see the family picture with the pressed out (dead) cigarettes in the front. Next to the ashtray we can see unlit cigarettes, a sign of what is about to come
one of the things that always destroys me about Neilās death was that it was decently into December, so Todd probably had a Christmas gift picked out for Neil that he never got to give to him
+ the impact of class-upbringing and power imbalance DPS ANALYSIS
Cameron and Charlie are characters placed in opposition both by the movie itself and the fandom; however this choice is not arbitraryātheir opposing traits and actions affect the narrative in ways which emphasize their shared psychology and the effects of their class-upbringing. They shape each other's stories in such a way that to separate them obfuscates the purpose of their narratives. It can be seen in how Charlieās rebellious nature is highlighted by Cameron's conformity, and how Cameron's seriousness is highlighted by Charlie's humour. They are what is known as āfoil charactersā to each other, defined as āa character who contrasts another character in order to better highlight or differentiate different qualities of them.ā
It is Charlie and Cameronās desire for validation, what to them is love, that separates them from the potential connections around them. They believe they cannot be vulnerable, and thus compensate for the deficit with humour or usefulness such as Charlieās frequent jokes or Cameronās tutoring. This can be seen most obviously in Cameronās search for the validation of authority, which Charlie humorously refers to as āprofessional bootlicking.ā He is an upstanding student who follows orders without question. For example, when the duty to deface a schoolbook, something symbolic of the administrationās sovereignty, is brought on by Keating he does so using a ruler, hesitantly removing the necessary pages cleanly. He does not want to disobey a teacher, yet finds himself conflicted when forced to question the ideals forced upon him. While his hope for love is shown in the hesitance towards Keatingās instruction, Charlieās is shown through the dedication he takes on to impressing Keating. When Keating comes to reprimand him after the phone call from God scene, Charlieās face falls and he mumbles, āI thought youād like thatā¦ā
The quote illustrates his personal motivations for the action: validation. He not only wanted to impress his friends, but also the one adult he felt understood by because they did not praise a dysfunctional system. Charlie and Cameron are both ultimately punished socially or capitally for their respective search for approval.Ā
Another way Charlie and Cameron search for love is through their shared role as the protectors of the group. This can be seen early in the movie for Cameron in his various comments on the danger of starting the Dead Poets Society and for Charlie in his aggressive support of Neilās acting career along with his choice to not reveal the other society members after being beaten by Nolan. This is further exemplified later when Cameron confesses to Nolan the secrets of the society, at which point the two become martyrs at each other's hands. Charlieās words regarding Keatingās blameāāMr. Keating? Responsible for Neil? Is that what theyāre saying?ā reflect his sceptical position towards their administration, with him seeing absurdity in the claim itself. Cameronās claim contrasts this. Cameronās, āYou canāt save Keating, but you can save yourself,ā comment is reflective of his attitude towards the systemāhe views it as inescapable but hopes he and that which he loves can survive within it. However, he makes this comment understanding that the other poets view Keating favourably, a willing ādeathā to protect his friends. Charlie commits to his own martyrdom when Cameron solidifies his position by stating āLet Keating fry!ā Together, they make choices of sacrifice only spurred on by each other's opposing actions, and thus lose the privileges they already held by a thread.
Despite their similar motivations, Charlie and Cameron walk separate paths written by their relationship to authority. Charlie is repeatedly acknowledged within the movie to be from a wealthier background than the rest of the poets, and his privilege shines into his own actions. He views the system as foolish because he sees it from inside; the components of a controlling environment are surprisingly simple upon closer inspection, and he has never felt the devastating effects of falling from its favour. His distaste forĀ the administration is shown through various scenes, including his mockery of Nolan and attempt to dissuade Neilās father after the play.
This is where Cameron varies from him; Charlie sees something to destroy, Cameron sees something which could destroy him. Cameronās family background is not explicit, but he is implied as middle class. Thus, he relies on maintaining good standing within the systemās ideals to be presented with mercy. This reliance creates a clear power imbalance between him and the administration, leading him to be susceptible to coercion and grooming. Cameron is not aware of the choices he is not given. He supports the actions of the poetsāNeilās play, Knoxās date, but does not dream of escaping his hierarchical box. However, from the outside of the box, Charlie sees its absurdity and sees no option but to destroy it. Their actions are directly informed by their class-upbringing, and the advantages or disadvantages theyāve been granted.Ā
Charlie and Cameronās parallels bring heightened depth to their characters and the overall narrative. Through their shared traits and actions, various intriguing topics such as the class divide and power imbalances are emphasized, adding layers to the story and beckoning new questions. They highlight the good and bad within each other which creates emotional depth and encourages an open perception of morality. Through the hatred, Charlie and Cameronās characters are inseparable.
"Neil could NEVER be queer." is such a stupid argument, not just because everyone can look at a piece of media and make their own assumptions and the relationship between Neil and Todd that can easily be argued as gay but the fundamental of having A Midsummer Nights Dream as the play he performs is already in defiance of that statement.
You have the obvious fact about Neil playing Puck that is a fairy which is a way gay men have been referred to but it lies so much deeper than that. Neil tells his father and friends that he got the main part, Puck. This again isn't exactly true. It's easily arguable that Lysander and Demetrius are more main characters than Puck. If the movie wanted to squash the idea of Neil being queer, why didn't they choose any of those parts for him? They are very heterosexual roles. Their whole plot/arc is this big romance misunderstanding that Puck causes. If the movie didn't even want to entertain the thought about Neil being queer than they could have definitely choose for those roles.
Yeah, you could argue back that Puck was chosen as his role to parallel Puck and Oberon's relationship to Neil and his father and while this is partly true, it still doesn't fully hold up. The only way this is ever referenced in the movie is in the "Oh, room, fairy, here comes Oberon!" scene where Neil's father tells him to quit the play. (I already explored this in this post). That is the only way we are ever eluded to this being a parallel. In the short shots, we get of Neil performing the play, we don't get any scenes of Puck and Oberon together. We strictly get Puck being a fairy. The fairy part is essential here in addition to the relationship Puck and Oberon have. Again if they didn't want to idea of Neil being queer then they could've easily chosen for a different play. There are a lot more plays that were written before the 1950s that included a relationship that could parallel Neil and his father's relationship without there being anything that could insinuate a queer reading. Neil being Puck was deliberately chosen.
Itās a bit hard to notice on the film (there arenāt many scenes where the angle is just right to show it) but the space in front of the board (where teachers teach) is elevated from the rest of the classroom.
My teacher told me some days ago than that used to be common when she was younger but that itās not done as often now. It wasnāt so long ago (sheās young) so maybe some of you also met it. I havenāt. When she told us this, it got me thinking and I had an epiphany in the middle of my ancient greek class.
They stand in Keatingās class, a lot.
His first class is literally them getting up from their desks, getting out of the class (this already has been analyzed a lot), and stand in front of the photographs.
Keating continues these classes, outside of class and while standing. Giving them freedom, by taking them away from the oppressive Welton environment, and also by making them stand, making them equal.
When two people are standing, theyāre equal, regardless of height. When a teacher is standing but a student is sitting, theyāre not equal, the teacher is higher and the student is forbidden from getting up. The teacher is meant to be listened to and paid attention to.
Keating is making them equal to him, but also empowering them too, giving them power (like the power teachers have over students, because itās the teacherās role to be standing, and Keating is sharing that role with them).
Even when theyāre not all standing, Keating almost always puts himself on his studentsā level, or even below them (weāll get there)
If theyāre on the same level (all sitting or all standing) then theyāre seeing face to face, theyāre equals. This is part of what was new about Keatingās teaching (since the boys are used to the rest of the teacherās traditional, strict, and disconnected teaching), he treats them as equals.
Itās no surprise than the first scene with Keating and the boys outside of class is with all of them standing.
When Keating is there emotionally for Neil, theyāre both sitting, so theyāre both equals.
Height = power. The higher you are (standing) the more power you have. If theyāre all standing/sitting then theyāre equal (if theyāre all sitting it doesnāt mean anything regarding power).
However, he isnāt always on their level. He is, after all, their teacher, and so he stands and teaches and they sit and listen. This is also a tiny proof of how he doesnāt actually abuse his power, unlike what mr Perry says.
But even when he is in a typical teacher position (standing in a room full of sitting people) he still deviates from this because he gets close to the students. Heās standing but heās also in the middle of the class, between their tables, leaning towards them, not in the front.
Thereās more height=power scenes in the movie. Youāll understand it better with examples.
Like Charlie getting up to actively challenge Nolan (and then lowering himself when he was getting punished)
And then Charlie sitting down when Keating (who is standing) goes to reprimand him (to act like a teacher, to teach him and scold him)
Or also Knox kissing Chris (who is laying down, with no power over Knox kissing her cause sheās asleep and unaware) in the party. During this moment, Chet is also sitting down, until he realizes what happens, and then gets up, punches Knox (Chet has the power), and continues standing while Knox is laying on the ground.
Or McAllister leading his students outside. It means he learnt from Keating, than Keating helped him aswell, and now heās treating his students more equally too, and giving them more freedom and power.
Maybe the football scene where they lift Keating up, too. Not so sold on that one but maybe.
Or Charlie and Cameron. Cameron standing vs the immediate inversion than comes after Charlie punches him. Cameron falls momentarily, Charlie has the power. Then he recovers and gets up and starts talking to them about how āif youāre smart youāll do exactly as I did and cooperateā and the thing is, heās right. Heās standing, you know what that means? That he has influence, power. Perhaps some of them (certainly not Charlie, and maybe not Todd, but some of them) agree with him. After all, they canāt do anything else. Cameron had the power in his hands by confessing everything and the rest of them are helpless to do anything. Can they bring Neil back to life? Make Nolan forget what Cameron told him? Give Keating his job back? No, theyāre helpless. Thatās why theyāre sitting at the start of the scene.
Of course, thereās also the standing on the desk scene. Keating stands first, and then they follow his example. He gives them a bit of power. While theyāre standing, Keating is also standing, but below them.
I would also say standing=confidence (sometimes). With Todd, mostly.
Obviously not every single scene with a sitting/standing character symbolizes something, sometimes theyāre just standing, but if I really try I can make it become something.
Like the fact than in this scene the only sitting characters are Cameron and (pre-confidence) Todd (a scene with Todd refusing to go the study group, most likely because of insecurity and anxiousness) (+ Cameron is very visible during this scene, even tho he has no reason to be, nor a reason to be seated in the first place. He was standing before, I checked, and only sat right before the camera panned to this scene).
Or Todd sitting down while writing (and then crumbling) Carpe Diem on a piece of paper, thinking he couldnāt possibly do it. Or Todd sitting when telling Neil he doesnāt wanna read at the meeting.
Or Todd sitting when heās writing a poem before he made his Whitman poem with Keating (and got a bit more confident), and post-poem heās standing up while writing another poem. (Also the lightning, pre-poem heās wrapped by shadows, post-poem heās under the light)
Or Todd sitting (initially) during the desk set scene, but then after Neil makes him feel better, makes him feel more confident (less insecure), he stands up. He has the power and throws the desk set.
Or Todd reading his poem in the deleted scene in the cave while standing, or Todd being forced to sign after Keatingās death while sitting, or even Todd being seated when the poets (who he just met) tell him thereās a study group, if he wants to go (he definitely didnāt go).
Or Todd sitting when telling Keating he didnāt write a poem (lies, he just doesnāt wanna read cause heās insecure) but then standing to make up a poem (which makes him more confident).
Keating lowers himself, while Todd stands. Gives the āstageā, the power, to Todd for a few minutes.
This scene also has a lot of movement.
Starts with (pre-poem) Todd sitting, and Neil appears, super excited, and lowers himself to Toddās level, theyāre friends, theyāre equals. Neil gets up and begins talking about the play and carpe diem, heās standing, heās confident, heās deciding to do the play regardless of what his dad wants, heās in power. Todd is still sitting, and he becomes the voice of reason, what if you father knows? Neil continues talking about how he wonāt know while standing, but eventually his excitement wears away after remembering his father is in power, not him, and so he sits down.
Then the ānoā scene, a sitting, unconfident, Todd and a standing Neil (who recovered from what happened before). The āIām being chased by Walt Whitmanā scene, theyāre both standing.
Todd sits a lot. Like, a lot. Heās basically always sitting. Well, at first. Towards the end of the movie not as much.
Like in the final scene. Todd is sitting in class but then stands up on his desk. Heās confident, he has the power.
But, we can mainly see the standing/sitting dichotomy with Neil. God, Neil. So, so, so many scenes with Neil and standing vs sitting.
One of the first scenes with Neil and his dad and boy is it a ride.
Neil is ātalking backā to his dad, thatās why heās standing, because he has got a bit of power, he dares to argue and try to keep the school annual.
The poets are sitting, powerless to help or intervene, after all, itās not their place. (Donāt ask why Todd is standing)
Mr Perry is standing, obviously, as heās in charge. When they get outside, same thing. Neil continues ātalking backā, trying to explain himself. Heās standing.
But then, in the deleted scene, he gets back inside after, and heĀ sits. He accepted he has no power in front of the situation, he accepted he canāt do anything about it.
Another scene with Neil and his dad. Mr Perry is sitting before confronting Neil about the play (he was powerless regarding Neil joining the play, he didnāt know about it and Neil joined despite his opinion) and then getting up to tell him to quit the play (heās getting his power back, forcing Neil to quit. However, Neil is still standing, heās still going through with the play, heās in control)
When he goes to talk with Keating (as I mentioned earlier) heās sitting. One, because Keating and him are equals in that moment, and two, cause he feels powerless.
During the play the poets (+ Keating) are sitting down. Theyāre powerless to do anything but watch. Watch as Neil acts, watch as Neilās dad takes him away.
Neil is standing. Heās in control, heās doing this against his father. Mr Perry is standing. He still has power, and heāll show Neil exactly how much power over him he actually has later.
(Also, Neil gets told to go see his father while heās sitting)
After the play, Neil is forced into the car (powerless to leave), and he sits.
And
Does this ring a bell?
The discussion starts with Neil sitting down, his mother ALSO sitting down, and his dad standing. He has the power, he makes the decisions.
His mother is also completely in the middle of mr Perry and Neil, so she agrees with both sides (or canāt choose who to support)
Then Neil stands up, ready to protest. His mom stands up too, to tell him she they were worried about him, and, following the standing/sitting motif, probably to back him up, if he spoke.
But Neil decides against it. Heās convinced his father wonāt listen, whatās the point? He loses his power. Gives it away. He sits back down.
His mother then gets near, and pulls herself to his level, lower, even. Ready to comfort him, but then stands up and leaves.
Neilās death sequence is so interesting because thereās so much movement and yet it still manages to be slow and quiet.
Neil is standing (he has control over his life now, he can choose whether to end it or not).
Then, Neil is sitting down, in front of the gun (heās not powerful, actually, heās powerless in front of his father and the only thing left for him is the gun in front of him. Remember, Neil didnāt wanna die, he just wanted to be free. He has no other choice if he wants freedom, heās actually powerless).
Then, his body is laying on the ground. No power left at all.
Regarding his father, heās laying down, sleeping (powerless in front of Neilās decision that heās taking in that very moment, he can do nothing about Neil wanting and deciding to kill himself).
Then, he gets up, ready to get mad at him, but when he sees neilās body and realizes, both neilās mom and him sit on the ground, powerless to do anything about their sonās death, because thereās nothing to be done now.
Then, Todd
And of course, the most iconic scene in the movie.
Theyāre all standing, Keating included, but Keating is visibly lower than them. He has influence, but he doesnāt have power anymore (he got fired). The students, tho, they got power, theyāre standing up. Also Nolan is visibly lower than them aswell, and very clearly powerless to make them get down. Does Nolan have power? Sure, heās standing and heās the principal, but heās also lower than them, powerless under them.
Not every student is standing, only those Keating helped, only those Keating made more confident, only those Keating gave power to. The ones who Keating changed their perspective (standing up in a desk was to see things from a different perspective).
tags: @neil-perrys-glasses @gay-mooshrooms @si-nemo-me-reminiscetur @make-much-of-time @autumnbookworm81 @neil-perrys-suicidal-tendencies (so many people omg)
Rewatched Dead Poets Society once more. As I do every time I watch it, I come up with more stuff to analyse, so...
I think the fact that before The Neil Sceneā¢ļø, he puts on Puck's headwear and slowly sorta shrinks in place can resemble a flower closing. I haven't actually read A Midsummer Night's Dream (forgive me native English speakers for I have only read 2 of Shakespeare's works), but because some props they used for the play were flowers and plants, it was definitely something that caught my interest (in approximately my 6th watch but ok)
Like, the night after the play seems very cold (before the play, during Cris and Knox's scene, we may see it as a bit warmer because of the colors and it being a moment not destined to be impactful in a sad way), and not only Neil opens the door and puts on the crown, but he also slowly looks down and the shadows cover him almost completely. I am unsure whether the allegory is a bit of a stretch or not, but I think it is a nice parallel regardless.
It's dramatic; theatrical. He did not die with Puck's crown on; he died being Neil Perry. Not a character, not an actor, not a person living the life they wanted to seize. I wonder if this scene could be seen as a sort of farewell to Puck, the only character Neil got to play. And he was good, really good.
