Dear Editor,
I just read Dr. Hendricks’ recent article in the Unification News (Jan. 98) about the movie Titanic. I found it interesting. I’m enclosing a review of the movie which was printed in The Washington Times that I thought you would like to read, if you haven’t already.
Personally, I haven’t seen the movie yet. I rarely watch movies, but, of course, most of my kids have already seen it and are gushing about it just like their friends’ mothers who took them. I almost considered going to see it but now after reading yours and this other commentary, I probably won’t waste my time.
Anyway, I wanted to say that I enjoy reading your insights and opinions in the Unification News. I wish the rest of the paper could connect us a little more to real life, as well, but...that’s a whole other matter, isn’t it?
The one thing I felt I should comment on regarding your interpretation of The Titanic, though, was your reference to the story of Romeo & Juliet. I am not a scholar and I only read that play in high school and then later saw the movie. However, I do clearly recollect that Romeo and Juliet were quite intentionally married before they had a relationship. You mentioned that they "abandoned parents, tradition and morality." I don’t see it that way at all. They were quite moral and the reason that their union would be opposed was because of the resentment and false pride which existed between their families. I know that in our church when couples marry cross-culturally or cross-racially, there is often opposition from their families, and yet in this instance there is a need to transcend the current "tradition" for a more universal one.
In Romeo & Juliet, as a result of their deaths, the parents were repentant and humbled. They vowed never to let hostilities cause such a tragedy again.
Your article brought up some good points but you lost me when you compared Jack and Rose to Romeo & Juliet. In fact, that was probably the original intention of the producers but they lacked a higher purpose and so, have led the gushing public down the road of sexual justification once again.
Cathi Close