'Never let go' has been discussed elsewhere on this forum in relation to the film.

However, as this is perhaps THE theme that runs throughout the film, maybe it carries through *after* the film. My point is, that there may be a message here for all of us. Of course we should 'never let go' of everything which we work hard for and hold dear - this much is obvious. But further that we should 'never let go' of the memory of Titanic and everything that she stood for and for all of the lessons that were learnt from her. With technology increasing at the rate it is presently is life today not an advanced reflection of life in the early part of this century as we ourselves head off into the new century, indeed new millennium?

This is just an opinion, and I would welcome anyone who agrees or indeed disagrees with this.

-- Simon (ia501060@ntu.ac.uk), February 18, 1998

Answers

Response to Never let go

Simon, I would have to agree.

We (humans) think we are so intellegent and that we can build something that can withstand the effects of Mother Nature; only to watch the damage from tornados, earthquakes, hurricanes, etc.

People should learn to respect nature and it's awesome power; because when we don't, we are the ones who suffer.

I believe it was pure ignorance and pride that sunk Titanic, and that is the greatest tragedy of all.

-- Becky Gordon (becky.gordon@pfs.sprint.com), February 18, 1998.

Response to Never let go

Wonderful comment. I agree with you 100%!!!

-- Rose (rose364@earthlink.net), February 18, 1998.

Response to Never let go

I agree! I think this line was incorporated into the script to remind the viewers of the tragedy and the lives that were lost. It makes people value love and friendships. Tragedy occurs and people suffer but their memories live on through others. TITANIC allowed us to experience the tragedy and to never let go.

-- Melissa (vamps@sprynet.com), February 18, 1998.

Response to Never let go

Jeez, were the attitudes above to prevail, we'd all be living in grass huts and foraging for berries. Part of our culture's fascination with the Titanic disaster has resulted from the ability to heavily freight it with associations and meanings that change with the zeitgeist; it's the ultimate modern-day parable. I think I heard that Walter Lord's fascination with the subject was with all the "what ifs", i.e. that so many things all had to go wrong for the tragedy to occur as it did. While we SHOULD take a cautionary lesson from the event, let's not think of it in terms of hubris/ate but more in terms of it being the ultimate example of Murphy's Law (anything that can go wrong will go wrong..) . Let's condemn the arrogance of individuals that led to the disaster without damning the human spirit for discovery and progress.

-- Dan Dalton (DDa2309070@aol.com), February 19, 1998.

Response to Never let go

Dan

Thank you for taking an interest in my point. Perhaps I didn't make my question clear for which I apologise. I wasn't intending that science and technological progress should be in any way stunted by the memory of Titanic and her lessons. What I am advocating is a co-existence of discovery and progress with these memories. I believe that this is happening now and hope that it will continue to happen, Titanic serving as a reminder not to revert back to these arrogant ways (not that we should ever need reminding).

I read with interest Becky's response which makes a very pertinent point with her earthquakes and hurricanes, in that the only reason why we build houses etc. to try and withstand these 'Acts of God' is because of the respect we have learnt for nature, that we must protect ourselves from this. If the mindset of these who had built the Titanic were such, I respectfully submit that there would have been more lifeboats on board and the tragedy would not have occurred.

There will always be arguments that there is a price for progress, I will not, for I cannot, contend this. But whether the price justifies the progress? Surely that is the question that must be asked, and in Titanic's case? I shall leave it to you to be the jury on this.

-- Simon (ia501060@ntu.ac.uk), February 19, 1998.

Response to Never let go

Simon, Perhaps i was overstating for effect. I quess I wasn't responding to your remark so much as Becky's. I'm not going to argue that the lack of lifeboats for all was the height of arrogance. I'm just suggesting that it wasn't a universal arrogance. After all, the ship had been designed and built to carry sufficient lifeboats for all aboard. Most people today will board a 747 with little thought of the possibility of catastrophic failure. I'm not sure I would call these passengers arrogant. My point was that we should learn from tragedies such as Titanic without making the disaster a necessary result of some universal human fault. It's just a matter of degrees.

-- Dan Dalton (DDa2309070@aol.com), February 19, 1998.

Response to Never let go

Above, that should be "I'm not going to argue that the lack of suficient lifeboats WASN'T.... Big difference.

-- Dan Dalton (DDa2309070@aol.com), February 19, 1998.