#so what i'm a poet

[deadpoets]

DEAD POETS SOCIETY (1989) dir. Peter Weir

[gayerthebetter]

The "your dad doesn't understand you but that's ok because I do/I feel like everything about me is worthless yet you make me feel like I mean something" ship.

[noweakergirl]

I keep these longings locked (the shoe) in lowercase inside a vault (his book)

part 1 in my Hilda Furacão series of edits

credits for some of the screenshots: x x x

[kiisuuumii]

@kiisuuumii (big age)

[pencileraser1]

things i noticed/thoughts about most recent rewatches of dps (plus laserdisk deleted scenes):

whenever theres a group scene i've started watching the characters that the story isn't focusing on to see what they do and i've been having a fun time with that. pitts and cameron specifically seem to almost always be doing something interesting in the background.

hopkins!!!! my favorite minor character who somehow got character development despite having like 2 lines!!!! the last guy to stand on the desk but he did it!!!

sometimes i do like to think about what the rest of the students thought about the dead poets society, esp in alternate timeline neil lives dps keeps meeting universe. like yeah theres this guy in their class whose one of the most credited students in the school and we think he maybe started a cult. idk though. but that group runs out into the woods every few days to do god knows what and one of them keeps talking about "dead poets honor" whatever that means and holy shit welton star student neil perry started a cult.

i watched the movie with headphones. and maybe it's because ive seen this movie Far too many times and mabe i'm listening too hard but it was Really obvious sometimes when audio was added in post production. llke in the sweaty toothed madman scene when you can hear laughing and to be fair the camera is behind their heads. but it does Not look like anyone's laughing. my favorite is at the end of the phone call to chris scene where knox is like i'm gonna seize the day!! and runs up the stairs and the poets are cheering him on and neil is sort of yelling "carpe!!!!" and i could be wrong but i'm like 75% certain that the person singing is Also rsl so now neil is just speaking two times at once somehow. anyways it didn't ruin the experience for me or anything it was maybe just a little bit funny to notice but very sorry if this did ruin anyone's viewing.

people talk a lot about how rsl and ethan hawke really made their characters what they are but i have to add dylan kussman to that list. I get the impression that older versions of the movie didn't really give as much depth to cameron and watching dylan kussmans performance is like. he Knew who his character was so fucking well and it shows!! like the deleted scene of them getting clubs assigned. like i could tell So Much about cameron from that scene

for how little she actually appeared, there is an emphasis put on the fact that neil's mom smokes pretty frequently. and i think that's interesting considering neil is one of two poets shown actively smoking. neil's mom doesn't appear for very long in the movie but during that time it definitely seems like the movie is intentionally making parallels between the two, particularly in the last argument with neil's father. neil and his mother are both sitting for almost the whole time, which contrasts with his father who is standing. they are both almost powerless in this scene. they stand up at almost the same time. anyways there's a couple different possibilities for what this could mean? that i've though of? 1. to show that neil's mother is in a similar situation to the one neil is in in regards to neil's father and 2. maybe a stretch here but the theory that neil inherited his mental illness at least partially from his mother. i'm pretty sure 1 was fully intentional on the directors part, not entirely sure about 2 though

unmanned flying desket scene: it's probably cause he and ethan wrote the scene themselves but the way rsl talks in this scene feels more like the way he talks in general than the rest of the script. like briefly neil perry is talking in rsl's voice. one of my absolute favorite scenes though the sarcastic dialogue is so good.

the light of knowledge at the first shot of the film vs. todd standing on his desk at the last shot of the film paralel

[ghorbanis]

ASHLEY POET and HOUR NAZARI Class of ‘09 | 1.03 'Thank You for Not Driving'

[pencap]

By Sylvie (j.p.)

[solaestial]

The Sweet Escape - Poets of the Fall

bonus version with fewer color tweaks

[hum--hallelujah]

actually "tell the boys where to find my body" is like top 3 FOB lyrics that makes me feel like I'm going to throw up

[observinghenrywinter]

I should post them some time🤭

[her-soliloquies]

Did not need this double reminder of pain on those last episodes

Just finished season eight and I really don't understand why the thing that happened had to happen

[shifthours]

me liking posts abt fandoms i know nothing abt bcs im a just lover like that🕊

[pyunyrage]

I'm like a rabid dog

a stray dog that has been beaten up so much

will always gravitate toward humans that hit it and neglect it

what is known might feel safer at times.

because he doesn't know kindness,

he will fear humans who care for him

more than humans who hurt him.

a stray dog wants nothing more than to be cared for

to be pet, to be fed, to be held

he wants his wounds to be recognized and his trauma to be seen

and he wants for others to love him and treat him tenderly

not in spite of his pain but because of it.

but he doesn't realize this

and he will continue to bite at the hand that feeds him

even when he needs nothing more

than to be fed.

[devasdiary]

Guys, there's something I never understood in dead poets society: the age of the poets (and their classmates).

We know from the movie that the poets are 17 in September (beginning of the school year) But!! In the book, it says that the poets are in junior year (11th grade?). (I haven't read the book yet, so I might be wrong but I'm sure I saw something like this somewhere). At the same time, it says they are sixteen in the book, but once again I'm not sure.

So what do we believe? If we believe the movie, they are seventeen, and they could be in senior year (which would be logical since Americans finish high school at 18? If I'm not wrong?). I don't remember a moment in the movie when they specified in which year they are. So for me they are in senior year.

If we believe the book, they are 16 (not sure) and in junior year. It means that they still have a last year of high school after the one we followed (with Mr keating and everything), or to be exact 1 year and a half since the story ends after Neil's death in December).

So I don't know which version is the right one, and i guess it doesnt make a big difference but i still need to know 😭😭 I'm not American so I don't know everything about the school system but I'm pretty sure y'all Americans finish school when you are 18 (or 17 going on 18 if you were born at the end of the year). At least in my country you finish school in 12th grade when you are 18.

If they are seventeen AND in junior year, it's not logical, here's an example from my school:

I was in 11th grade this year (like the poets in the book) , and during the first part of the school year (September-December) everyone was 16 (or 15 going on 16 if born at the end of the year). So people started to turn 17 from January to December of 12th grade. And on January of 12th grade, they start to turn 18, and in June, high school is over and some people are 18, and others are 17 going on 18.

The poets would be 17 in September of junior year, so they still have 2 full years of high school, which means they would finish high school at 19? But I thought Americans finished high school at 18? :')) Maybe it's different because Welton is a private school or because it was in the 50s. But yeah it's not logical to me and I need to understand 😭😭

Maybe I'm wrong and they are not even 16 or in junior year in the book and I made that up 💀 that would be sad

What do you guys think about it?

[kiisuuumii]

@kiisuuumii (solar eclipse)

[greenerteacups]

Hi! I am an ardent fan of your writing, and I hope to be as sorted and planned as you some day in my own writing journey.

My question is: you have a keen eye when it comes to planning character personality, dynamics, and such. I've also been wading through your ask replies, and your insights into how you write people and how you make them play off of each other is so wonderful to read. If it's not too personal a q, how did you learn how to write like this? Did you go to school for writing, does it come from years of observing people, do you have reading list recs for "how to write real people and real interactions"?

Thanks! This is a really flattering question. I'll try to answer it honestly, because I wish someone had been brutally honest about this with me when I was a young writer.

I didn't go to school for writing. I started doing it when I was about nine years old. It sucked very badly. I kept writing throughout high school, and it still mostly sucked, but some of it was occasionally interesting. ("Interesting" here does not mean "good," by the way.) I took a break in college, and then came back. I've been writing ever since. Sometimes, I feel good about it. A lot of the time, I don't!

I hate giving this advice, because I remember how it feels to get it, and it's the most uninspiring, boring-ass, dog shit advice you can get, but it's also the only advice that is 100% unequivocally true: you have to write, and specifically, you have to write things that suck.

I do not mean that you should make things that suck on purpose. I mean that you have to sit down and try your absolute hardest to make something good. You have to put in the hours, the elbow grease, the blood, sweat, and tears, and then you have to read it over and accept that it just totally sucks. There is no way around this, and you should be wary of people who tell you there is. There is no trick, no rule, no book you can buy or article you can read, that will make your writing not suck. The best someone else can do is tell you what good writing looks like, and chances are, you knew that anyway — after all, you love to read. You wouldn't be trying to do this if you didn't. And anyone who says they can teach you to write so good it doesn't suck at first is either lying to you, or they have forgotten how they learned to write in the first place.

So the trick is to sit there in the miserable doldrums of Suck, write a ton, and learn to like it. Because this is the phase of your path as an artist when you find what it is you love about writing, and it cannot be the chance to make "good writing." This will be the thing that bears you through and compels you to keep going when your writing is shit, i.e., the very thing that makes you a writer in the first place. So find that, and you've got a good start.

Some people know this, but assume that perseverance as a writer is about trying to get to the point where you don't suck anymore. This is not true, and it is an actively dangerous lie to tell young writers. You are not aiming to feel like your writing doesn't suck. You are aiming to write. You are aiming to have written. Everything else is dust and rust. And of course, you'll find things you like about your pieces, you'll find things you're proud of, you'll learn to love the things you've made. But that little itch of self-criticism, in the back of your brain — the one that cringes when you read a clunky line, or thinks of a better character beat right after it's far too late to change — that's never going away. That's the Writer part of you. Read Kafka, read Dickens, read Tolstoy, you will find diary entries where they lament how absolutely fucking atrocious their writing was, and how angry they are that they can't do better. A good writer hates their sentences because they can always imagine better ones. And the ability to imagine a better sentence is what's going to make you pick up the pen again tomorrow. And the day after that. And the day after that.

Which is what I mean, and probably what all those other annoying, preachy advice-givers mean, when we say: a good writer is just someone who writes every day. It's that easy, and that hard.