What bothers me about The History Boys

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 1:06am

The History Boys is a wonderful play. Loquacious, thought provoking, funny and a touch condescending, it's just the sort of thing I enjoy. And it's never boring, even the scene conducted entirely in French. There's poetry, movie reenactments, even Rodgers and Hart. The set changes are even interesting with projections (which pull us out of the world of the play a little bit but are effective). Also, the play isn't precious. It is a bit aloof. Bennett obviously loves his characters but he doesn't go to great lengths to try to make us love them too. The situations are complicated. Yet ultimately, it tugs at your heart. The acting is first rate and the guys are gorgeous.

That aside I want to make some observations about the play. Don't read on if you haven't seen it, spoilers abound.

There is a strong statement being made here about the increasing value the western world places on style over substance, to quote Brantley. While Irwin is right--the world is looking for a spin, the spirit and heart of the story belongs to Hector and his belief that education and learning are life long pursuits (a value I agree with).

The play is dishearteningly realistic though. The boys are only able to succeed after taking Irwin's lessons to heart, and Hector is only able to succeed (keep his job) when Dakken finds a way to force the system. Nobody is an innocent here. While Hector may have spirit and soul and honesty, he also fondles boys' balls and perhaps maintains a sham of a marriage (and by extension, a life). The play also goes on to point out the lack of practicality in the pursuits of knowledge and art. But it also points out the soullessness of the things that make the world go 'round (the pursuit of money and political power and law keeping). The play's ultimate conclusion is that the quixotic pursuit of ideals has no place in the modern world, what with Posner's outcome.

Now, here, that really bothered me a lot. Up until then I had found little to object to in the play. Now, I'm really not much of a reactionary. I don't cry foul every time I see the slightest suggestion of homophobia. But I thought I'd make some observations about The History Boys.

The show has prominent gay themes. Irwin and Posner are explicitly gay, and Hector is probably gay (he does fondle attractive boy's crotches). While yes, this is an old fashioned pederasty (and certainly a suitable pursuit for Hector, enamored as he is with the history of culture), in today's society we would probably consider this homosexuality. Irwin and Hector both suppress their homosexuality. Irwin is presented as a stammering failure and ultimately sell out, and Hector is a doddering fool. Even Posner is encouraged to suppress, he's told "he'll get over it" despite his insistence that he doesn't want to get over it.

All the other characters are presumably straight. They go on at length about sexual pursuits. Dakken enjoys a more fluid sexuality but he's obviously the sort of person willing to do most anything to achieve a goal. He is, presumably, straight, and a winner, in the end.

So what happens? Irwin, who has already become a troubled, repressed individual, is confined to a wheel chair. Hector finds that his life long belief in education has (apparently) failed him and dies. Posner becomes old and lonely and can never figure out what went wrong.

Now first off, this is a complaint about the dramatic structure of the play. I thought the sudden tragic ending was a little out of left field. Also, the play itself is meant to be a tribute to Hector's character.

BUT we're told that his lessons only live on in Posner's heart, and as consequence Posner lives a life unfulfilled in any way.

I feel like this is really old school homophobia. The eccentric gay characters are punished with loneliness and failure. With Irwin and Hector, it is explicitly because they are gay. But the open, impulsive, and headstrong Posner, who in no way ever displays any qualities of a person who will grow up and become that sort of person, is doomed to a life of loneliness. We even get direct evidence of Posner's ambitions late in life. The other straight characters are certainly not doomed to such sad fates. Dakken may flirt with homosexuality but he isn't a homosexual. I can't help but feel the inevitable conclusion that it's because Posner's gay. I felt really offended by that. I thought that by the year 2006 we were over this sort of thinking, you know? Especially since Mr. Bennett IS gay.

I'd like to hear other people's thoughts on this. Please, only if you've seen the show or read it. I know I'm just being a reactionary, but it really bothers me!

[mint0621]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 1:16am

I think you brought up really interesting points. I, too, thought the play was witty, parts were funny...but something bothered me about the play. I can see that you were able to get to the root of the issue more than I have :)

Thanks for sharing your ideas. I think your thoughts were well thought out and logical. And it's nice hearing other points of view as well.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 1:23am

While that was a remarkably written and alarmingly perceptive post, I look at it a little differently.

Posner is the only one of the boys (Dakken included) that we really get to SEE. He's the boy that really, truly, and honestly shares his fears and desires with us (past getting good marks and getting into a good school). It's on purpose that the only boy that appears honest and wholesome is the boy that ends up lonely in the end - we feel the most for him, and then at the end when we learn of his fate, we're more upset than we would be if we found out that someone like, say, Dakken ended up alone. Dakken is certainly appealing, but at the same time he's just a self-obsessed user. We like him, but we FEEL for Posner.

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 1:31am

Don't really feel that it's homophobia at all. I know myself, and a lot of gay men, have gone through life saying that it is only a phase and that we'll "get over it". Many gay men have thought that. What's so wrong with facing that reality?

This goes back to the BROKEBACK issue. Just because they were closeted, does that really make it not an important film for the gay community?

Ya know what I mean, jellybean?

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 1:34am

I don't think that's the point Joey was trying to make...

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 1:39am

Thank you Mint.

I agree Munk, and I think the homophobia I perceive is subconscious (because it is very old school). Posner is the most open of the boys. He's also apparently an old soul. Although the other boys individually share certain traits of his, he is the character we most intimately get to know (Also Dakken, but we never get to experience Dakken's emotions). Considering his age, it's more realistic that we would see a different Posner than the Posner that is to come. The Posner of the future, by implication, could easily become the sort of person who doesn't fit into the real world after being presumably rejected by it.

All the same, I can't help but feel that the play's psychology is ultimately saying it's because he's gay. These are hard characters to boil down into stereotypes so take the following with a grain of salt. Being gay is Irwin's character flaw, it is Hector's, and because Posner has no apparent character flaw but is equated with Hector at the end of the play, I feel that it was a subconscious thing on Mr. Bennett's part. Posner is meant to be a stereotype, but I found it almost unbearable and it has colored the way I look at the whole play, which is really unfortunate because I love 98 % of the play.

Yes, the normal reaction would be: "Wow, that's unfair". life/history is unfair. But somehow it just... came off as a statement. Perhaps if the character had come across as less of a winner I wouldn't have made this inference, but he was a handsome, bright, and talented boy. It's unimaginable.

This is one case where you'd really like to pick the playwright's brain.

Updated On: 5/4/06 at 01:39 AM

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 1:43am

I hate to say this, but I think you're looking into it too much.

It's the right choice to have Posner's life turn out lonely and disappointing. He's the only one of the boys we feel for. IF he wants us to feel slightly sad and reflective at the end, Posner is the correct choice for the boy to be left lonely. He's the only boy we feel for, so he's the only one that would make us feel sad if we found out he was to live a lonely life.

There's obviously deeper implications to what Bennett is saying, but I would have to re-read and re-see this play again to really pick up on it.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 1:51am

Yeah, I'm worried that I'm reading into it too much. If I ever had the chance though, I'd ask Mr. Bennett about it.

Although there's a difference between "Posner led a lonely life" and "Posner became an obsessive loser who spent all his time reliving his childhood and talking to people on the internet". It's kind of hyperbolic. I preferred the brief glimpse we got of him as a grownup. I guess I just don't like the conclusion of the play.

On a brighter note, I thought the actor playing him was remarkable. You could watch him the whole play and it would be totally worth it. A detailed and complex performance.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 1:53am

I agree - he is remarkable. In fact, all three of the leading boys are wonderful.

However, my pick for the Tony is Dominic Cooper. He gives a performance that most people twice his age couldn't give.

What's so remarkable about this production is that although the boys aren't exactly KIDS, they have such a grasp on the material that it's almost alarming. They have such an understanding of the material - and that's something that most actors generations ahead of them can't even come close to claiming.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 2:00am

It's an incredibly smart play, and the boys make it believable that the characters have the intelligence they supposedly have. They really understand the material.

I think Dominic Cooper is one of those actors who understands how to act with his body. The guy used a lot of body language that added so much to the character.

Everything in this play is believable, which is a big thing for me. You don't even think twice about whether or not the play is believable.

I'm DYING to see His Dark Materials. I wish there was a taping available of it.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 2:01am

There's only one thing I found unbelievable.

The fact that someone of Mr. Griffith's size could actually ride a motorcycle.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 2:15am

Heh, I thought the same exact thing. I got all excited when I thought they were going to show us him actually RIDING the bike. I guess we'll have to wait for the movie!

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 2:15am

oops, double post

Updated On: 5/4/06 at 02:15 AM

[Effie]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 3:38am

I was also sad to learn how Posner's life turned out, but I think Bennett's point is that in our "Irwin-ized" society, there isn't room for people like Posner. He was, after all, the one boy who "truly took everything to heart, remembers everything he was ever taught... the words of Hector never forgotten." The boys who didn't heed Hector's lessons were able to adapt to a soul-less society. Posner was "too good" to be able to do that. At least that's my take.

[Smaxie]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 8:10am

Bennett has specifically addressed the Posner issue you are bringing up RoninJoey. He has said that Posner's fate is not due to the fact that he's gay. Bennett is saying that lonely young men often grow up to be lonely old men. His sexuality is not the determining factor in that equation.

[mabel]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 8:58am

I agree with Munk in that we find Posner's outcome much more upsetting, because he was the one that we really grew connected with over the course of the show (that and his fate was delved into in the most detail). To be honest, it doesn't sound as if most of the boys went on to live stellar lives. Timms owns some laundromats (or dry cleaners, or whatever) and spends his free time doing drugs, Dakin is a (presumably) shallow cog in the corporate machine (frankly just as sad, since I believe it's mentioned by each of the professors at some point that he's the cleverest of the lot...sad to have him wasted/corrupted by Irwin's way of thinking), the lot that become magistrates/headmasters are said to be working within a society which basically has no use for them anymore. I guess Scripps has one of the least iffy outcomes (a journalist at a seemingly reputable paper, who still has the urge to move past that all, in an effort to really write, suggesting he's held onto Hector's philosphy/teachings).

I have to run, so I don't have time to read over that and see if it makes any sense, but I think the ending is fairly true to life. Most people end up having SH*Tty jobs that aren't fullfilling, and there are certainly a lot of lonely Posners out there who wake up at 50 one day and "wonder where it all went wrong." I don't think it necessarily has anything to do with his being gay (despite being in wheelchair at the end, Irwin seems to have had a fairly "successful" life in television and politics)...I think it's definitely more on par with Bennett's explanation that a lot of time lonely young men end up lonely old men. I found the ending sad, but probably more realistic (and in that sense, more satisfying) than "Posner finally finally found true love, he managed to pick up where Hector left off, teaching and inspiring generations of young people."

[Fosse76]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 10:36am

One point: it's not pederasty. The boys (except Posner) are of legal age. Griffiths has stated that this is the one misconception about the show he wishes Bennett would have more clearly articulated.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 10:39am

Correct. Posner is the only boy he outwardly rejects for a ride on his bike.

[mint0621]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 10:43am

My friend had a completely different take on Dakin, which I thought was interesting.

Dominic COoper has said that Dakin was not meant to be manipulative at all. (This was in an audio slideshow on NY Times, by Dominic Cooper, which I can't find right now).

So my friend, looked at Dakin who was insecure and wanted to please everyone...Irwin, his girlfriend, the other boys, Hector. I think that's how Dakin was meant to be portrayed.

Although, I agree with Munk, I totally saw Dakin as a manipulative user as well. But I seeing Dakin in a different light makes me like him a bit more

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 10:52am

Interesting conversation!

I can't help but feel that none of the characters' flaws is the 'gay' thing. I think all three characters needed to be gay in order to avoid homo/hetero bashing. Posner is poised between two schools of thought: knowledge as a pursuit unto its own and knowledge spun to get ahead in the world. Had one of the characters been straight, Posner's choice would eventually be seen through the prism of choosing either the "hetero" life or the "homo" life. Because both characters are gay (to a degree), it removes the issue of sexuality from the equation. Then we are left to debate the issues without injecting 'Well of COURSE he took the homo route and ended up lonely' or 'Of COURSE he took the hetero route and ended up successful.' Because both sides are represented through two gay men (both of whom are closeted in some respect), the issue of sexuality is gone. It's why it is the least "gay" gay play I've ever encountered.

And Joey...didn't you take me to task for finding some old school homophobia in BROKEBACK???

Updated On: 5/4/06 at 10:52 AM

[Smaxie]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 11:24am

Actually Dominic Cooper said in the Times audio that Dakin can seem manipulative and conniving, but Cooper tries to straddle a line to keep the character likable and charismatic. I believe Dakin is one of those characters who "has it all" - the people with looks and brains that you envied (or secretly admired) in high school. I think he comes on to Irwin the way he does for two reasons: he feels that he can't get through to Irwin on an intellectual level, so he plies his looks; and two, he is trying to get Irwin to live his life the way he teaches, sensing a divide between Irwin's words and his actions.

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 11:28am

And really...who doesn't want to give a little oral to a hot 18-year-old?

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 12:34pm

You're right that the issue of sexuality is erased UNTIL the end of the play. I think the argument could be made that the play suggests Posner's homosexuality as a reason FOR his loneliness.

But accepting that as a certain possibility, there's also really nothing wrong with that. The characters aren't so easily boiled down, and homosexuality is just one of many reasons Posner ends up lonely. The play does suggest that it can cause problems for people, but we know that.

I re-thought my position on Irwin. I don't think the play offers any evidence that Irwin may be suppressed because of his homosexuality. I mean, we only see him in encounters with a student. Of course he'd be reticent. So I'm backing down on my claim that the play is homophobic. After that initial reaction I started clutching at straws.

I still think the ending kind of blows though. The whole motorcycle accident thing was way out of left field. As Brantley pointed out again, the play does have a whiff of Irwin about it. I guess he had to end it somehow though.

On to other topics!

I think it starts out as a quest for Dakkin to win Irwin's affections (which would lead us to assume that Dakkin is only able to feel good about himself when he knows he has the respect and admiration of the people around him) but I think that's just whittling the character's psychology down into little explanations, which is unfair because the characters are so well written and played.

I think I stayed mostly out of the endless Brokeback threads RobbieJ, but if I did (I might've, I don't really think it's a homophobic movie), we have to keep in mind that Brokeback Mountain is set during the age of old school homophobia, whereas The History Boys is set during 1980s England. Not saying there wasn't homophobia, but not the kind you encountered in the 60s in the god fearin' bible belt of America.

Ah, you're right about the pederasty thing, I remember a big deal being made out of the other boys being old enough.

Actually, I think all the other boys had realistic outcomes. I'm not saying I was looking for a happily ever after. But having all your dreams come true and living a long fulfilled life is just as unbelievable as Posner's ultimate outcome. It happens, sure. I'm not sure what you found satisfactory about it, Mabel. Perhaps you could go into more detail? I think the point is that it's UNsatisfactory?

And thus satisfactory?

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 1:16pm

I think his lonliness stems from his taking Hector's life philosophy to an extreme. We could debate that, in some ways, that stems from his homosexuality. Hector, though married, encouraged a classroom full of boys to knowledge through many roads, including non-traditional gender roles. Instead of mocking boys reenacting the final moments from NOW, VOYAGER, it was celebrated. However, Posner chose Irwin as his confidante in coming out. Why? My thoughts is that he felt Irwin would be sympathetic because Posner intuited his sexuality. Of course, he was met with 'You'll get past it' instead of positive reinforcement. In that moment, Irwin loses the ability to instill in Posner his view of learning and the world.

So I guess I revise my opinion that sexuality has nothing to do with the show. But I don't think I would ever label it 'homophobia'.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 5/4/06 at 1:45pm

Yeah, I think it has to do with a lot of things. I don't think he so much took Hector's teachings to heart too closely as he ultimately came to them for comfort. I get the feeling that Posner just didn't succeed in the world. At first I was looking at it (the perception of homophobia) as possibly a subconscious thing, but I imagine Bennett knew what he was doing there. I definitely give on that one.

It's interesting because I never got the feeling during the play that Posner was particularly attached to either of the teachers.