The Final Act: Dead Poets Society

By Heartscape Intern, Chia Yu

If you have yet to watch Dead Poets Society, do be warned that there may be major spoilers ahead (but it was released in 1989, so…).

I recently sat down to watch Dead Poets Society after it was recently added to Netflix. Reviews online label it as a thought-provoking coming-of-age movie about a group of young boys and their English teacher challenging pre-determined norms. It was thought-provoking for sure, and the carefreeness of youth really draws you in. What really caught my attention, though, was the character of Neil Perry and his unfortunate end (spoiler alert:) by suicide.

For those who are unfamiliar, Neil is portrayed as a natural leader. He was incredibly smart and passionate but constantly struggles under the heavy weight of his father’s expectations to become a doctor. We follow Neil’s journey as he seems to finally find something he is passionate about – acting, struggling with the stifling environment his parents have created, up till the moment he decides to take his life and the consequences that follow.

I will be diving deeper into Neil’s death, from the perspective that it was not a single event that led to him pulling the trigger, but rather the tragic outcome of the psychological conflict between the authoritarian pressure he was experiencing and his internal struggle of building his own identity.

The External Force – Authoritarian Parenting

Portrayed very strongly from the start is Neil’s father's authoritarian parenting style. An authoritarian parenting style is typically when a parent enforces strict rules on their child and expects them to follow without question or negotiation and failure to do so is typically met with punishment. Accordingly, a child raised by authoritarian parents is typically well-behaved due to fear of consequences (Sanvictores & Mendez, 2022). 

Neil had his whole life written out for him by his parents, from attending the Academy to studying to become a doctor, with seemingly no regard for what Neil may want to do. For example, we see that Neil discovered a passion for acting, something that he was extremely talented in as well.

Despite attempted communication with his father about this, his father was adamantly against it and even decided to send Neil to a military camp so that he can successfully complete his medical education without further distraction (seen by Neil as a severe punishment). Multiple times in the film, Neil’s fear of his parents’ disappointment in him is obvious and heartbreaking.

Rather than having his talents and hopes nurtured, this created an environment where Neil was constantly suppressing his own desires and wishes, seeming to always live out a life that his parents wish for him rather than one he might write for himself.

The Internal Conflict – Identity vs Role Confusion

The firm grip that Neil’s parents have on his life catapults Neil into a psychological crisis that is rooted in his developmental stage. 

According to the theory by Erik Erikson, children at Neil’s age are striving to develop their own identity (Block, 2011). The lack of nurturing and an inability to explore who they are and wish to be may lead to role confusion, or a struggle in finding out their purpose in life (McLeod, 2025). As such, it is unsurprising to see Neil struggling between his imposed identity and one he wishes to have.

This imposed identity is a classic example of identity foreclosure, a term used to describe a commitment to an identity without prior exploration, often as a result of parental pressure (Wooten, 2011). Neil's father dictates that he will become a doctor, completely ignoring his son's passions and desires. This rigid path robs Neil of the opportunity to define himself, leaving him in a state of deep psychological distress.

Interestingly, it is Neil’s new English teacher, Mr. Keating, that first gets him to consider the idea of becoming who he wants to be through the idea of carpe diem (i.e. seize the day). 

This idea directly challenges the identity foreclosure imposed by his father, empowering Neil to take his first steps toward a life of his own making by defying his father’s wishes to play the lead role in a play. However, his courageous act of self-expression is met with pushback from the rigid school system and, most importantly, his parents, setting the stage for the tragic end to his internal struggle.

The Tragic Culmination

In the film, Neil tries at first to keep his acting gig a secret from his father – an attempt to juggle both identities. It falls apart when his father inadvertently finds out about his lead role through an acquaintance and dismisses Neil’s acting dreams with a finality that shatters the fragile identity as Actor Neil that he was trying to build.

This plants a small seed of hopelessness in Neil and leaves him feeling trapped in the identity imposed on him. This is closely connected to the idea of entrapment, which is the feeling where one is trapped in their current life situations and the only way out is to end their lives (Moscardini et al., 2021). Analysing Neil’s case leads to a theory that, at his young age, it seemed then that his dream of becoming an actor had become permanently unattainable. There is no version of a future where his father would not be writing his own narratives. This apparent sense of hopelessness is a likely trigger for his decision to tragically end his life. It can also be theorized that his suicide was a final act of defiance and courage to take back control of his own life when he believed that there were no other options.

The Blame Game

Who is to blame for Neil’s suicide? The movie pins it on Mr. Keating for planting ideas in his head with the logic that Neil would never have thought of pursuing something else if not for Mr. Keating coming to the Academy.

It is the familiar old debate. Perhaps it’s his father’s fault for pushing Neil to his breaking point, perhaps it’s his mother’s fault for allowing this to happen. Or maybe they just really wanted their son to have what they perceive is a good life to reduce the likelihood of him suffering in the future. Perhaps it is the school’s fault, or even Neil’s fault. Does it really matter? When a tragedy like this happens, it is typical for society to seek out someone to blame. But the true “cause” for suicide is typically a complex web of interconnected factors, especially in the real world.

Neil’s struggle seems to mirror various issues widely talked about today. One of which would be the idea of success. Even with slowly changing mindsets today, the idea of being a Doctor, Engineer or Lawyer is still regarded as the pinnacle of success. The stress of this never-ending rat race to be the best has a profound effect on students. It also highlights society's tendency to blame external catalysts for mental health crises. Instead of scapegoating a single person or event, Neil’s story compels us to look at the deeper, ever-present systemic issues that contribute to such tragedies. 

Certainly, society today has changed a lot since 1959, as portrayed in the movie. Yet, the lessons from Neil's story remain a powerful call to action. Playing the blame game distracts us from deeper, potential systemic flaws that may be contributing to more young people falling through the gaps. Ultimately, it is a societal shared responsibility to work towards a culture where others will feel seen, heard, and supported.

References

Block, M. (2011). Identity versus role confusion. In Springer eBooks (pp. 785–786). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79061-9_1447

McLeod, S. (2025, April 18). Erik Erikson’s Stages of Psychosocial Development. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/erik-erikson.html#Stage-5-Identity-vs-Role-Confusion-12%E2%80%9318-Years

Moscardini, E. H., Oakey‐Frost, D. N., Robinson, A., Powers, J., Aboussouan, A. B., Rasmussen, S., Cramer, R. J., & Tucker, R. P. (2021). Entrapment and suicidal ideation: The protective roles of presence of life meaning and reasons for living. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 52(1), 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12767

Sanvictores, T., & Mendez, M. D. (2022, September 18). Types of parenting styles and effects on children. StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK568743/

Wooten, R. (2011). Identity foreclosure. In Springer eBooks (p. 779). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79061-9_1442