I need people to understand that no matter if you ship Anderperry or not, Dead Poets Society does undeniably have queer undertones. You could take Todd out of the story entirely and it would still very much be queercoded. It's not just in him having a uniquely intimate friendship with Todd; it's thematically and, if you are open to the idea that acting is representative of anything other than itself-- narratively a queer story.
Dead Poets Society is the resistance of the herd, the need to protect your truest self from a society that will look down upon it, the want for freedom from a society and family that does not accept you for who you are, the finding of similar community that will understand you in a way nobody else will, the shoving down of your truest emotions and most passionate parts of yourself to appeal to your family that rejects it, being unaccepted for who you are, being an outcast because something is uniquely different about you, redefining of the self so that you can be something real even if it costs you everything, etc. etc.
Every theme, every lesson, and entire character arcs (particularly Neil and Charlie's) are applicable to queer stories and elements. This is SO important to me.
Neil's life and eventual death were never about Todd, they were about his father not letting him act. Acting is portrayed as this thing of absolute importance to Neil, this part of him that was-- for the record-- always there.
"Ever since I can remember, I've wanted to try this. I even tried to go to summer stock auditions last year, but, of course, my father wouldn't let me. For the first time in my whole life I know what I wanna do. and for the first time I'm gonna do it whether my father wants me to or not! Carpe diem!"
The movie isn't him finding something cool and flashy and whining about not being able to have it that some people (cough, my mother, verbatim,) claim-- it's him finally taking for himself the thing that he's always seen, been attracted to.
And the way the school treats it after Neil's death? The way his father sees it? The "No, not my son. Not Neil. Someone (Keating) must've put him up to this because no son of mine is an actor." That? That's very distinctly the response of parents to queer children. Not artists, not even the neurodivergent.
Furthermore, the scene where Neil goes to Mr. Keating's room and says he's trapped-- right before that, we get introduced to the idea that Keating has a wife. During it, we see that Keating, though he cares about Neil and recognizes his struggles, does not understand them. I've said it just about a million times before to friends and mutuals but showing his wife right then is to show how he is an ally, not one like Neil. He's straight, he's an ally, but he does not get why Neil can't just wait and why him being rejected as an actor-- or gay-- is so important and why his father wouldn't be swayed even if (and when he eventually) sees how important this really is to him.
Neil was gay. The movie is queercoded. Anderperry is not the only sign of that and is, really, simply the bit that further shows it. I'm sick of people looking past all of that.
pixelskylines
andulkaphoto
jacobvanloon
kianamaiart
kaledo-art
theartofmadeline
vaporwave
gummygunk
