an essay for Farkel

by teejay 50 Replies latest jw friends

  • teejay
    teejay

    Last fall, my second year of college English was based on the movies instead of classic literature. The textbook dealt with cinematic elements (lighting, sound, camera position, etc) as the tools filmmakers use to tell their story beyond mere dialog. The assignments involved watching clips of film, determining what the filmmaker was saying by his use of those elements, then writing full-bodied essays based on our assessments.

    One of the film clips we saw was from Dead Poet's Society. The clip is about seven or eight minutes long. It comes near the beginning of the film, when there is a flock of birds shown, and goes to the point where the class of boys stands in front of the trophy case. What follows is the essay I wrote for that clip.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    Time Flies - Seize the Day

    Time flies. As the warmth of summer yields to the cold of winter, human beings are on an inescapable path to the grave. Since that is so then we must make the most of the time we have been given. This is one of the central themes of Dead Poets Society, a film directed by Peter Weir and starring Robin Williams as English teacher John Keating who uses unconventional methods to teach his students a love of poetry and a zest for life at the prestigious and ultra conservative Helton Academy, "the best prep school in America." With dialog, camera shots and sound Dead Poets Society reminds us of the brevity of life and the need to make the most of the short time we have.

    First, it's with dialog that the clip makes its point clear. Keating leads the group in a brief discussion of a poem. The meaning of the words, "Gather ye rosebuds while ye may/Old time is still a-flying/And this same flower that smiles today/Tomorrow will be dying" are unambiguous. As a stand-in for the more dim-witted of us, however, one of the students offers the view that the poet was "in a hurry." Having a total lack of consciousness for the presence of death in their midst, the students reveal that they have missed the point. Perhaps we have, too. Correcting him, Keating drives home the movie's central theme: "We are food for worms, Lads. Because, believe it or not, each one of us in this room is one day going to stop breathing, turn cold and die." The thrust of the poet's words are as plain and unyielding as death itself. Finally, as the clip ends, he solemnly repeats for emphasis, "Carpe... carpe... carpe diem. Seize the day, boys. Make your lives extraordinary." Time is passing. There is not a single day to waste. Underscoring this dialog is the visual images captured by the artful use of camera shots.

    The beginning of the clip uses a subtle view of a clock to symbolize the passage of time as it tolls the end of another day. Displaying a clock to denote the passage of time is cliché, yet here the director uses a shot from a low angle, forcing us to acknowledge Time's mastery over us. We look up to it. We can't accomplish anything without it. Seen from a ground-level perspective, we feel our smallness, our insignificance in comparison. The impressive size and weight of the clock tower demonstrates that Time itself is our master, constantly impacting our every move.

    Later, a high shot further minimizes the individual importance of the students as it records the group as they quietly file into a foyer, almost encircling the disturbing placement of a closed casket that occupies the most significant part of the frame--"dead" center. Incredibly, this tangible symbol of the grave and Death itself, so obviously out of place, might as well be non-existent. They are scarcely aware of either's presence, being too young and vibrant to give death or the coffin a moment's reflection, betraying their disregard for death's reality. Why think about death? Their attention is fixed on Mr. Keating and today's schooling that is as hand. Yet we cannot help but notice the coffin as it dominates the center of the foyer. It's as if Death is a character on the screen, present and accounted for, speaking lines of dialog. If not before then surely now we are forced to consider one of the movie's major themes--the transience of life and the ever-present, unrelenting call of the grave.

    The scene moves to its powerful climax. Keating directs the group to a trophy case that proudly displays emblems of past athletic achievement and glory and photos of former students of a bygone era. The boys in the picture do indeed eerily resemble the living, and we can be sure that Keating's words of the hopes and dreams they once entertained is also true. But as the living boys have something in common with the dead, the dead also have something the living will also unavoidably share one day--the quiet inactivity of the grave. The camera superimposes their reflection with the items inside the glass, visually uniting the two groups. They are one and the same. Seconds later, this metaphysical merge is reinforced by a haunting camera angle from within the trophy case, with its contents overlaid against the image of the boys outside it. In a tight close-up, the boys, facing the camera and us, lean in. They cock their ears as they strain to hear us. From inside the trophy case, we are dead, too, sharing the space of the boys in the photo, and the living boys get close so as to hear our legacy, the same as that of the boys, spoken by Keating: be busy about living.

    Lastly, it is with sound that the film makes its point unmistakable. The clip opens with the "Gong... Gong... Gong..." of a steeple clock. Time is passing. The end of another day has come. It's the fall of the year, and a chill can almost be felt in the austere autumn scene as another year is coming to a close. The screen fills with the flapping of countless wings as a tremendous flock of birds take flight. They call to each other as they gather to migrate south for the winter. The sounds of the innumerable birds gradually builds, filling the screen with their honking sounds. It is a time of change.

    As the calls of the birds fade out, unintelligible conversations fade in. We see a countless group of students moving down a spiral staircase, "flocking," as it were, like birds. Their collective, rhythmic conversations, commingling as they move from one class to the next, perfectly mimics the calls of the birds seen at the beginning of the clip. The blending of the two similar sounds--the cawking flock of birds with the din of the students as they move--suggests that as the birds are in a physical transition the metaphysical journey of the anonymous group of noisy students is about to take place. Change is in the air.

    As the clip ends the lack of sound is used to poignant affect--a sound unto itself. Keating speaks in a low, raspy voice, the kind of voice one might expect to hear emanating from the grave. His voice is the only sound we hear. His words are the legacy the former students might offer if they could: "One day you'll be dead, too. Use your time wisely." The last ten seconds of the scene is "deathly" quiet. The oxymoronic sound of silence is deafening. We are forced to think about the words for what seems to be, like death, an excruciatingly long period of time. The silence is heavy and begins to overwhelm as the scene closes. The metaphoric silence transports us to the stillness of death itself.

    This clip serves as an effective thesis for Dead Poets Society and as a worthy moral by which to live. Dialog, camera shots and sound are skillfully blended to remind us that life is far from permanent, and even if we fortunately escape untimely, accidental death, the inexorable passing of time will eventually bring all of us to our end. Couching this maxim in the context of a school setting is very effective, for it's when we are youngsters at school that life is at its cheapest and we take life as for granted as the clean air we breathe and the clear water we drink. We are seduced with the belief that life is endless. This movie clip reminds us otherwise.

  • dedalus
    dedalus

    Farkel wrote:

    Now, when will YOU post an ESSAY of substance so we can have a go at it? Or are you just lazy? Or are you just a coward?

    Still waiting for you to post an essay of substance. This cliched plot regurgitation doesn't quite cut it.

    Dedalus

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    Fine and dandy tj,

    I won't critique it. I'm sure your professor is much more qualified than me to do so. I saw the movie, and liked the movie immensely. Your views about the movie were er, so obvious to those who understood the thesis of it. Your essay was pablum, but that's ok.

    In all fairness to you, you do have a pleasant style of writing.

    Of course this board is about dubs and dub issues, not about movie reviews and/or your ruminations about them.

    I'll be more specific this time: can you write an essay that we ex-dubs can relate to, i.e. one that involves dub issues?

    This takes some work. And thought.

    Can you do that? Digging out an essay you've already written is fine and dandy. Building an essay from a subject that concerns dubs and has not been dealt with before takes some effort. Can you perform?

    If you can, I will be in the forefront to applaud your efforts.

    Farkel

    "When in doubt, duck!"

  • Tina
    Tina

    cliche-ridden and trite.

    Carl Sagan on balancing openness to new ideas with skeptical scrutiny..."if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense-you cannot distinguish useful ideas from worthless ones."

  • larc
    larc

    teejay,

    I can not comment as to whether your essay is trite or insightful. That is probably because the movie did not hold my interest, even though I know that others hold it in high esteem. I think there are two reasons for this. One is the subject being dealt with holds no interest to me anymore. Second, the student - teacher relationship shown in the movie is so rare as to be almost nonexistent, at least in the subjects I taught.

    Teejay, I will give you an A for effort. I think you put a lot of thought into this. I think the crowd is a little hard on you because of the bias some of your earlier posts have caused. I think if you stay out of the area of interpersonal nit picking and continue to submit posts with content, that public opinion will turn around.

    As I mentioned before, your comments on what you learned in social psych. were useful additions to the board, in my opinion.

    Now, you may think that comments here have been overly harse. Better get used to it. I have submitted articles for publication and this is mild by comparison. Three pages of critique are not fun to read, and I have read that regarding my own precious words.

    Teejay, I am just trying to stay in my role as educator, but don't irritate you or I will start calling you bad names. -:)

  • larc
    larc

    Teejay,

    I went back and read your remarks about Farkel's work on the subject of Matt. 25. Teejay, that was real, real dumb on your part. In the middle of lengthy comments following Farkel's excellent work, you choose to throw in a barb - not the way to establish credibility. It just makes you look foolish, son.

  • teejay
    teejay

    Still waiting for you to post an essay of substance. This cliched plot regurgitation doesn't quite cut it.

    Oh, I'm sorry, Dedalus. I didn't know you were there or that I needed to meet YOUR requirements. I'd ask you to 'show me yours,' but I don't really care about comments from the peanut gallery... folks like you who sit on the sidelines and can only muster criticism for the participants. People who do what you've done here are sad.

    Be that as it may, Farkel wanted to see "an essay." The one I posted qualifies. Thank you for your comments.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Farkel

    In all fairness to you, you do have a pleasant style of writing.

    Thank you. You show uncommon fairness toward me here, and I appreciate it.

    Of course this board is about dubs and dub issues, not about movie reviews and/or your ruminations about them. I'll be more specific this time: can you write an essay that we ex-dubs can relate to, i.e. one that involves dub issues? This takes some work. And thought. Can you do that?

    I have a subject in mind, been meaning to post, but it's gonna take a little time to get it together. In the meanwhile, read this: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=5084&site=3. btw, what do you mean by "a subject that concerns dubs." I'm serious. Not all dubs are the same. Give me some parameters. I'll see what I can do.

    If you can, I will be in the forefront to applaud your efforts.

    Again, a fairness I knew you were capable of but never thought I'd see expressed toward me. Thank you.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    larc

    I think the crowd is a little hard on you because of the bias some of your earlier posts have caused. I think if you stay out of the area of interpersonal nit picking and continue to submit posts with content, that public opinion will turn around.

    I understand the make-up of this particular crowd and why it acts the way it does. If the mix were different, so would be the reactions I received. I have no problem with that.

    Secondly, you say I need to quit nit picking. I think you say that because you have a problem with my opinions and wish they were more in line with yours... in other words, more 'correct.' I think you need to grow out of that limited way of thinking. People are different. Accept the reality of that, with all its implications. I don't have to think like you, I don't have to share your viewpoints. I really expected you to come to my defense at least a little... the "nit picking" to which you point, in all fairness, wasn't nit picking at all.

    Third: the opinions of strangers mean squat to me. Hell, sometimes it's hard for me to give the opinions of my family very much weight. The accusations made about me are common, found even in those hurling stones.

    Now, you may think that comments here have been overly harse.

    No, I think: "that's Larc being Larc."

    I went back and read your remarks about Farkel's work on the subject of Matt. 25. Teejay, that was real, real dumb on your part. In the middle of lengthy comments following Farkel's excellent work, you choose to throw in a barb - not the way to establish credibility. It just makes you look foolish, son.

    I didn't mean it that way, really. To be honest, I didn't read every word. Farkel's work, like Alan's, would have served me better had I come across them seven or eight years ago. As I mentioned, I don't read the mags anymore, and commentaries on them don't do me a bit of good. Getting to the point, I scanned through it and got what I thought was the gist of it.

    The englishter suggested that I was afraid to respond. I did... to him... twice. Has he answered? I don't know... I haven't checked yet. I will shortly. You think my remarks were dumb? Cool. Whatever. At least you answered for him. I'd a thought a real man would have answered for himself, especially one who talked so bold. Of course, even you haven't answered the question I asked him. I'm not surprised. Even Larc is selective in the questions he answers. I don't blame you. I would be, too, if I were you.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    thanks all for your comments. Even you, ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((tina)))))))))))))))))))))))))). , my favorite JW.com blonde.

  • AGuest
    AGuest

    Man, I am SO glad I am not a 'scholar' (may you all have peace). To subject myself to such 'scrutiny', and open myself to such 'debate' is ludicrous. Hey, wait a minute... that sounds like what I do here all the time!

    HEY, YOU GUYS! I'M HOME!!! And I missed you all... IMMENSELY... even though I know one or two... or many, many more... of you (hey, there, Daddy-O) didn't miss me. Ah, well. Just dropped in to say...

    PEACE! And may JAH bless!

    The same 'ol me, who took a few days off, went on vacation, did some 'spiritual stuff'... and came back an 'unchanged' woman... well, not entirely, I received a new 'gift'... and, thus, still a slave of Christ... (sorry, D...)

    SJ (who will now bow out of this thread so that those who 'wish' to can continue without... ummmm... any chagrin due to little 'ol me...)

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    teejay,

    I would say, "May you Have Peace," but someone else already has trademark on that one!

    :btw, what do you mean by "a subject that concerns dubs." I'm serious. Not all dubs are the same. Give me some parameters.

    I think the majority of dubs who are still capable of forming their own thought would be interested in seeing any solid work in these area:

    JW doctrine/policy that clearly supplants or supercedes the Bible
    (That alone should give you six or seven hundred subjects to select from!)

    Distored or falsified JW history in WT publications

    JW doctrine that clearly contradicts hard science

    JW social dynamics that clearly are the antithesis of civilized ethics

    Anything along those lines would be great.

    Note, it is not necessary to write on a brand new subject, since I doubt there is any JW subject that hasn't already been covered. Pick a subject that interests you and put your own style and flair and observations on it.

    Alan F and JanH and NormH and I have oftentimes covered exactly the same subjects, but we all treat and present them differently. That way, there are styles of writing that suits many different people, even if the subject matter is the same.

    No hurry, and you don't even have to do it if you don't want. If you like to critique the work others, jump into the pot and see what it's like to be on the other side of the fence, though!

    Farkel

    "When in doubt, duck!"

  • larc
    larc

    teejay,

    I really don't care if your opinions are different than mine. Duns ideas where very different than mine, but I respected his comments. Once he reduced the amount of polysylabic bull shit, we got along. Run on over to the Determinism thread and read carefully, don't skim.

    Not only were you dumb for throwing a barb, but you are dumber for admitting that you only skimmed the thread. Your excuse? You have been out awhile and don't need it. Son, I have been out nearly 40 years, almost as long as you have lived, yet when I choose to post to a thread, I read it carefully before I compose my thoughts. I suggest you do the same. Otherwise, I will refer to your unintended words as lies, like you do of others.

    As far as you caring about other people's opinions, I think you care a lot, otherwise you wouldn't go on and on in endless threads about who said, what, when, and with what intent.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit