Attitudes and Class Distinction

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,923
181
193
I thought that one amusing aspect of the film was Jack's apparent inability to learn anything from contemporary artists. After going to Paris all he can produce is conventional drawings such as any competent commercial artist can turn out. Hardly surprising really, as the drawings were produced by former commercial artist, James Cameron.
 
K

kate fisher

Guest
all very good points, but Shelley was right! One tends to think of the past as stuffy and formal, when really love is ageless! And there are no limits to what one will do for love.
One of the things that amused me most about the film was the relationship Rose has with her mother. I know I was definetely sassy to my mother when I was seventeen, so I laughed, because I thought maybe all daughters at that age were sassy, even eighty-nine years ago in 1912! I tried not to tie myself down to picking apart stuff in the movie, because I do love it. I can forgive a few little faux-pas'!
 
S

Stacie Crowther

Guest
When i was 17, like Rose, I dated a Jack. He was fun, attractive, and a musiaian but he was poor as a church mouse. My parents were quite disgusted and wondered what a girl like me was doing with such a "loser from that side of the tracks" (south glendale). In Glendale, Cal there are north Glendale (nice) and south Glendale (poor).

We were upper middle class, not rich though, but very comfortable. We never had to do without. As i got older and moved to college in San Jose, we drifted apart but 16 years later still remain friends. He turned out with an ok job and a great wife, plus is a devout Christian nd very kind. I now feel that I would not be married to someone who has quite differing values now because we are accustomed to certain life styles. Our generation falls short compared to our parents as it is.

Sincerely, Stacie C
 
J

Jason Smith

Guest
People were exactly the same in 1912 as they are today. The only difference is that the social 'laws' of the day were more stricter, that's all.

When people look at photographs of Queen Victoria and people of the age, usually they're not smiling. But this isn't because people didn't enjoy themselves, it's because they're formal, official, serious portraits!

Gives you with the mistaken impression that all Victorians and their European and American contemporaries were stuffy...
 
D

Deb Boyken

Guest
How about the differences between 2nd and 1st class, though? Were they able to mingle together? Eat together? Socialize? Visit? Obviously by ticket price and wardrobe there would be distinctions for dinner and such, but for regular mingling? Was it possible?
 
J

Jason Smith

Guest
Class distinction was the same in Great Britain and Europe as it was in America at that time. I might also add that strict immigration laws in America dictated that the classes should be separated by barriers.

Yep, I kid you not. Atlantic liners had barriers between 1st, 2nd and 3rd class as a requirement of American law! Well, that's what I read! Yet it's only us nasty old English that lock people below decks to die horribly
sad.gif
...
 
K

kate fisher

Guest
poo! Jason, you are too hard on yourself! I think that people were much the same in 1912 as they are today, and the same several centuries ago. Adultery, pre-marital sex, and murder have been occuring since the beginning of time-sorry I will quit with my sociology talk. Just trying to make a point:0)
 
Feb 13, 2002
99
0
136
What would it have done to the movie if Rose's Mother liked Jack ? Perhaps James didn't paint the people in their natural light, but it was important to the storyline. It's been a little while since I have seen the movie, but I seem to recall Rose's Mother huddled up to Molly, of whom she wasn't very fond, in the lifeboat...where as before, she was beating feet to get away from her. And they were both first class! They even pulled rank in their own circle!

IMO "... a lesson learned in time"

I have no idea why that Green Day quote popped into my head.
cool_shades.png


Steph
 

Richard Paola

Member
Nov 17, 2001
74
0
136
i would have to agree with Jason...Cameron missed the mark on social behaviour of 1912. Rich daughter Rose leaving comfortable life for poor Jack?..sure, it's possible, maybe, given some time if they lived around the corner from each other or something...but all within 2 or 3 days of meeting on a ship in the middle of the Atlantic ? highly unlikely...Sorry! And the great lengths she went to !?social ridicule, being shot at, almost drowning, freezing to death...for what ?
 
S

Stacie Crowther

Guest
I agree with you, Richard. Though a masterpiece, there were certain behaviours and quotes that did not suit the era but were designed to appeal to the modern 1990's lifestyles. HMMMMM, good marketing technique.
 
Jul 10, 2005
676
0
86
Ahhh yes,....Modern day, Romeo and Juliet. And face it, Jim was smart to ace Leo as the leading man. Pre-teen girls spend BIG bux to see a beloved heart throb in the same film 5 or 6 times. And the story line... Rebellion is the original sin is it not?

His upcoming documentary should be great stuff. And in 3D no less??? Only Jim Cameron would work so hard and use his "magic" to appease our "been there, done that" and "gotta have it NOW" society.

An earlier 3D IMAX Titanic film was made, but it won't have the painstaking detail and the ambitious probing to answer long asked questions that Jim will give it. Not to mention that fact that he went "where no man has gone before" inside Titanic. (to coin a pharse)
The publicity he has already generated by the webcast and using the advice of major Titanic Historians adds to the appeal.

You are right Stacie, GOOD marketing techniques.

Richard, when you talk about all Rose went through to be with Jack, the social ridicule, being shot at, almost drowning and freezing to death.... you hit the mark!

I think one of the best scenes of the film that hits the nail on the head from that observation, is the scene on the stern of the ship during the sinking, and Jack is holding onto Rose and the stern rail for dear life, and Rose says to Jack, "Jack, this is where we 1st met". Jack smiles, kisses Rose on the forehead and pulls her tighter to him. How is that for romance??? Everyone is about to die in the freezing water as the ship goes down and Rose is romantically reminiscing. (sp) *heavy sigh*

How many young ladies, in real life, would go through all that, just to be with a man that she is infatuated with? It sounds ludicrious doesn't it? But, in all actuality, husbands and wives have been murdered so that the "disenchanted" party can be with the object of their desire. And that has been since the beginning of time. Very doubtful that would occur in 3 days time though. (the point).

1912 or not, the film hit big.

Ok, enough of my silly rambling.

Beverly
 
T

Tim Gillis

Guest
I think Cameron's film wasn't 1912 because just look at how Jack and Rose talk and act. Definatley not something from the old days.
 
B

Bill DeSena

Guest
Hi All,

I'm late to this thread so here's my two cents!

I always thought Jack should have been dropped over the side by the body guard, Lovejoy, and had it been true to 1912 ethics and practices he would have been shark food before the berg came along.

The Progressive Movement was just starting to give the upper class a sense of social consciousness with better housing, health and working conditions for the poor, but upstarts like Jack would have been harshly dealt with notwithstanding.

The story may have had flaws big enough to steer Titanic through without hitting anything, but, was still fun and as a theatrical device worked well. How else was Cameron going to allow the prying eyes of his viewers to see the boiler and stow holds without a couple of crazy lovers romping around the ship providing the teens in the theather some heavy necking coaching to boot. If he had gone for the documentary approach and used only actual persons and dialogue the movie would have become too stiff and hard to follow. He would have lost most of the general audience and hence the investors cash. If that had been the case a strickly 1912 authentic film would have been a historic piece of filmography as no one would ever finance anything like it again!

Cheers
Bill
 

Kris Muhvic

Member
Sep 26, 2008
295
0
46
Greetings~

One thing that I pondered, I'll bring up here: Cal and Rose were engaged, not married, yet they shared a suite. Was this "OK" by 1912 standards? Sure, the future mother-in-law was hovering around, still...

I am not one to take the adage: "Oh! people just did'nt DO things like that back then!" Sorry- it's been all done before, but there was a social expectation that was adhered to, by those who wanted to keep up appearences, correct? I was only wondering about the "almost married" take back then.

Yours~
Kris
 
J

John Meeks

Guest
Hi folks,

Having a lazy evening browsing the site and found this interesting thread...so please excuse me if I "go back a few" postings (and several months!) to make a (smart-ass..) comment...

With regard to "locked gates" and class barriers - has anybody recently tried drifting into First Class on a '747 to take a look around, use the 'can', or order a drink...?

Try it. I don't think very much has changed at all...!

Regards,

John M
 

Don Tweed

Member
Mar 30, 2006
590
1
86
I have to agree with all who stated that not much has changed in social behavior since 1912.
The separation of classes is true today as it was then.
And as for Roses leaving the lap of luxury for squalor, I would like to talk to the person who has unlocked the secrets of a 17 year old girls mind!!!
Just my opinion!, Don
 
D

Daniel Odysseus

Guest
To Kris's post:
Don't forget that Rose and Cal were in the parlor suite, meaning that they each had separate bedrooms... Plus, they were practically married, because, back then, an arranged marriage was HARD to get out of, and since the wedding was planned, like Cal said, she was "his wife in training, if not yet by law."
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,923
181
193
The thing that struck me about the Rose/Jack story is that it is the ancient melodrama plot used since the year dot and especially in the 19th century. The essentials are the nice young girl, her poor but honest suitor and a rich villain who has designs on her. The rich villain often has a hold over her parent or parents, because he has a mortgage on the family farm or some such thing. The girl's mother is often a widow. The villain usually has a wicked steward or some other kind of servant.

You can end the story as you like, depending on how weepy you want it. You can let the villain get his just deserts, boy gets girl and mother keeps the farm. At the other extreme, you can do as in Lucia di Lammermoor, which ends with the girl, her boyfriend and the villain all dead and the girl's family presumably broke.

Gilbert & Sullivan sent up the genre in Ruddigore.