Category: The History Boys

Alan Bennett’s The History Boys uses the opposition created between the characters of Hector and Irwin to structure the play and question the education system. The two characters are naturally opposed – in age, teaching style and fundamental beliefs. This creates comedy which is used, perhaps to convey the playwright’s personal beliefs and relay his experience with the ‘Oxbridge’ system. In Bennett’s introduction to the play, he explains how he felt he had ‘cheated’ to gain a scholarship to Oxford and as a result was unhappy there.

The first meeting of the characters of Hector and Irwin sets up an opposition that remains for the rest of the play. The ‘Brothel scene’ is interrupted by the Headmaster and Irwin, and the boys are forced to pretend they were acting out a scene from the First World War. Perhaps this interruption is a comic reflection to the intrusive effect Irwin’s method of teaching will have on Hector and the boys – they must forget the truth and lie, much like the pretence of the First World War scene (this in turn could be extended to the nature of the modern education system). Tension is therefore created by Irwin’s intrusion, and also by the fact that he is clearly more knowledgeable than Hector (‘comoitionne’, meaning shell-shock). This tension could be used by Bennett to polarise the characters of Hector and Irwin.

The comedy of the boys pretending they are in a brothel ‘where everyone speaks in the subjunctive or conditional’ is inflated when Dakin’s character is caught by the headmaster: ‘Pourquoi cet garcon… Dakin, isn’t it?… est sans ses… trousers?’, and the boys have to pretend they were acting out Belgian First World War hospital. When Hector and Irwin’s characters next meet with the boys in a classroom, they are discussing and debating the origins of the Holocaust. The lack of comedy in this scene is highlighted by Irwin’s treatment of the topic – the horror of the holocaust should be studied as objectively as any other historical topic. Bennett’s use of structural juxtaposition allows for a huge amount of focus to be placed on the opposing teaching styles of Hector and Irwin by the audience (which is perhaps used to raise questions about the education system). Bennett uses the comedic structuring of each scene (comedy vs. serious) to highlight the other. Therefore, he could be using these two scenes to show how diametrically opposed Hector and Irwin are, in their philosophies of teaching. The playwright, it seems, uses Hector to propose the idea of ‘truth’ in education: ‘Why can you not simply condemn the camps outright as an unprecedented horror?’, while Irwin tells the boys to ‘distance themselves’.

The National Theatre version of The History Boys uses a very focused set – a classroom and a staff room. In the play itself, Bennett notes that he deliberately didn’t include many stage directions in order to retain the fluidity of the performance. One question raised by the playwright regards the ‘notion’ of education. Two views are offered through the opposition of Hector and Irwin’s characters. Hector’s teaching style is centred around truth; thoughtfulness – used to prepare the boys for ‘life’, rather than examinations. For example, Hector teaches the boys to ‘learn the literature by heart’ – ‘learn it now, and you’ll understand it whenever’. When Timms’s character argues that ‘most of the stuff hasn’t happened to us yet’, Hector replies: ‘But it will… and then you will have the antidote ready!’. Irwin’s philosophy of teaching is centred around the idea that truth is unimportant; that education is merely a means to an end (in this case, Oxford and Cambridge are the goals). The staging here could be used by Bennett to highlight the comedic opposition of Hector and Irwin.

Bennett’s use of the headmaster simplifies the opposition of the characters – Hector is ‘passionate… yet unquantifiable’ and so Irwin is needed for results, where the headmaster’s main foci are league tables. In this way, it is arguable that Bennett uses the comedic juxtaposition of Hector and Irwin (for example, their first meeting in ‘the brothel scene’, or more seriously the Holocaust discussion scene) to critique the aims of the current educational system.

Bennett uses Hector’s character to raise questions about truth. Indeed, he is shown as a strong advocate of truth, for example in the mock interviews held in the classroom: ‘Can I make a suggestion? Why can they not all tell the truth?’ On the other hand, the character of Irwin is dead set against ‘the truth’, going as far as to say ‘What has truth got to do with anything?’ It is made clear that Irwin’s character believes that education is a game – and that the boys should cheat in order to achieve places at Oxford and Cambridge. The idea of ‘cheating’ is one that Bennett confronts in the prologue to the play, acknowledging himself to have ‘played the game’ by disregarding truth in order to achieve his place at Oxford. The playwright goes further to say that Posner’s character may be a reflection of himself at sixteen, and he ‘winced’ to hear Sam Barnett (who played Posner in the National theatre and film versions of the History boys) as his younger self.

Posner’s character is partly used by Bennett to reflect the negative effects of ‘The Irwin method’ of teaching. He was awarded a scholarship, he feels, for arguing that ‘Hitler was nice’. However, what is made clear by Bennett is that Posner’s character feels his integrity (both religious and personal) has been compromised in order to ‘pull [the school] up the table’. The reality of Irwin’s method is gleaned when it is revealed that while at Cambridge, Posner suffered multiple breakdowns. This revelation disrupts the comedy of the play and perhaps causes the audience to question ‘The Irwin method’ This could be a reflection by Bennett in regard to his unhappiness while at Oxford as a result of ‘cheating’ for a place. Furthermore, such breakdowns suffered by Posner could be a commentary on the destructive nature of modern education. Therefore, it seems natural that the audience would ally themselves with Hector’s character over Irwin, after bearing witness to the perilous nature of modern ‘education’. In terms of the context of reception, Bennett’s use of Posner in this respect could be seen to be a commentary on the current education system – one where students are just statistics who are forced to play the game for a place at university.

On the other hand, it is possible that Bennett’s characters are not as opposed as they may seem. In some respects they are similar – the greatest and most obvious being their shared attraction to the boys themselves (in Irwin’s character’s case the focus of his desire seems to be Dakin, having been built up towards the end of the play) – ‘I wondered if there was any chance of your sucking me off’. Hector’s character displays a more overtly physical attraction to all the boys but Posner – groping them while on his motorcycle. Conversely nothing physical actually transpires between Irwin and Dakin, but Posner’s character notices the attraction: ‘Our eyes meet looking at Dakin’. Hector tells the boys that ‘the transmission of knowledge is in itself an erotic act’ – does the comedic treatment of these sexual improprieties make the audience complicit in their development? In terms of the context of reception, any sexual relationship between a teacher and a pupil would be seen as a gross abuse of power – yet the audience of the play are led to laugh at such ‘abuse’ (Hector fondling Scripps’s Tudor Economic Documents).

The final scenes of the play maintain the opposition between Hector and Irwin. Metaphorically, the motorcycle crash could be used by Bennett to symbolise the harmful nature of Irwin’s philosophy. The comic moments leading up to the crash are juxtaposed with the crash itself; this is in itself comedic. Dakin comments: ‘trust him to lean the opposite way to everyone else.’ Is Bennett saying, that compromising our beliefs causes damage? Indeed, while Posner gained a scholarship to Cambridge, he is portrayed as feeling a cheat for ‘lying’ – something that could be the cause of his multiple breakdowns. The audience are then invited, almost, to call into question their own beliefs and assumptions regarding education through Bennett’s use of the juxtaposition between Hector and Irwin.

Alan Bennett presents the attitudes towards women in The History Boys in a variety of different ways. One way that Bennett does this is by highlighting the lack of female characters in the play. There are only two female characters in the whole of the play, with only one of these characters having any lines. Mrs. Lintott is another history teacher at the grammar school, who can arguably be considered as one of the most important characters in the play. She’s a very assertive, caring, and intelligent individual who knows a huge amount about the subject. However, although she helped the students achieve excellent A level results, Mrs Lintott still isn’t seen as being ‘good enough’ to get the boys into Oxbridge. Her key role in the play is to contradict the traditional idea of women being submissive to men, and although she’s only one of two women in The History Boys, she uses her position to emphasise how women are muted in society. This can be seen where she states that women “never get around the conference table”, and that “history’s not such a frolic for women as it is for men”. She acts almost like a maternal figure towards the boys, which is a big difference compared to how the men in the play treat the other women around them. Fiona is the other female character in the play, who is the Headmaster’s secretary. She is sexualised throughout by both the Headmaster and Dakin, who explains to the other boys how interested he is to have sex with her. One can also find out that the headmaster has been “trying to cop a feel” of Fiona, as well as “chasing her around the desk”. It’s only when Dakin learns about this that he begins to show a level of respect towards her as an individual, not just treating her as an object.

Furthermore, Bennett uses Mrs Lintott’s character to make fun of the men that she’s surrounded by. For instance, she recognises how sexually obsessed with women Dakin actually is. When speaking with Hector about him, she states she “wouldn’t have said he was sad. The use of maleorientated language like the word “c**t”, a noun primarily used by men, to mock the men around her demonstrates how Mrs. Lintott is an incredibly witty woman, with a dry sense of humour – she uses sarcasm and perspective to emphasise the inequality between men and women. Another instance of this happening is in the second act of the play, where she explains to Hector how “history is a commentary on the various and continuing incapabilities of men”, and that “history is women following behind with the bucket.” Lintott believes that men are so good at History because it’s a subject dedicated to story-telling, where the men can make themselves seem a lot better than they actually are. However, it can also be argued that Mrs Lintott feels confined in the school environment and that by using more male-orientated language, restricts her personality.

Another way that Bennett presents attitudes towards women in the play is by making frequent references to the development of feminism in the 1980s. During the time of when The History Boys was set, the idea of equality between men and women still hadn’t been acknowledged (or accepted) by many people. Feminism was a theory that was still relatively new at the time, and the fact that Mrs Lintott taught in a maledominated school makes her much more interesting in context. She describes the feminine approach as “rueful, accepting, taking things as you find them”. The use of the adjective ‘accepting’ indicates that she keeps to her analysis of the approach. This can later be seen in the play when she is ‘accepting’ of Irwin taking over the teaching of her students. As previously stated, the boys see Mrs Lintott as a maternal figure, which proves that she holds a level of power over them. There are various examples of powerful women that dominated the 80s, from pop culture figures like Madonna and Cyndi Lauper to authoritative figures like Margaret Thatcher. To add to this, people like Princess Diana challenged the ideas of behavioural norms of women, which is similar in terms of how Mrs Lintott recognises the way women were ‘put to the side’, and in a way like Diana, contradicted the tradition of women being submissive.

In conclusion, Alan Bennett presents attitudes to women in The History Boys through having a lack of female characters. The fact that there are only two women in the play (with only Mrs Lintott having any lines) portrays how women felt silenced at the time, and that they weren’t considered to be equal to men. Bennett uses Mrs Lintott as a character to break through the stereotype that a woman was unable to speak her mind, and through her intelligence and wit, she does this incredibly well. The boys in the play mostly speak of women in a disrespectful and objectifying manner, and this is particularly highlighted through Dakin’s ‘warfare’ metaphor for his relationship with Fiona, who is treated like a sex object by both Dakin and the Headmaster. By setting the play in the 1980s in a male-orientated environment, Bennett creates an insight into how teenage boys (and older men) spoke about and treated women at the time.

The complex exploration of homosexual relations that break the boundaries between pupils and teachers should be typically identified as scandalous, and as a form of paedophilia in a school. However, Alan Bennett presents the issue at a modest grammar school in Sheffield in a radically different manner. For Bennett’s characters in The History Boys, such contact seems to be merely a normal aspect of school life.

Hector’s character is constructed to be that of a “humane generalist” as depicted by John Sunderland for The Guardian, shown in Hector’s worldly knowledge of the literature that he regards with compassion. His irreverence is equivalent to his passionate and almost religious faith in the power of literature as something that “is precious whether or not it serves the slightest humane uses”. However, the complexity of Hector’s nature is revealed in the juxtaposition of his passion for literature and his grotesque form. The construction of his character is depicted in his physical appearance as “a school master of fifty or so”, old enough to be labelled as ‘perverted’ for groping the boys. Additionally, the way in which he conducts his “general studies” lessons in such an informal and familiar fashion presents bawdiness, which serves as an aspect of comedy for the audience. The mutual exploration of boundaries of authority and physicality in the relations between himself and his students demonstrates his familiarity with the boys through the comedic use of bawdiness in his lessons; he even cultivates the role of the eccentric professor by hitting the boys as a demonstration of his fondness. Apparently, “he hits you if he likes you”. Furthermore, the way in which Hector “gropes” the boys in a sexual manner would cause his character to be alienated in a modern society as it is undeniably “not normal” and repulsive behaviour, as the Headmaster later warns him, reinforcing the idea of Hector’s grotesque form.

The headmaster’s dismissal of Hector, after his wife witnesses him groping another student in public, is a test to the audience’s view on homosexuality. The headmaster himself sexually harasses his secretary Fiona; however, his actions are not challenged, unlike those of Hector, who is forced to have an early retirement due to his sexual preferences. Arguably, Bennett is subtly insinuating to the audience the prejudice and social stigma that was attached to the gay community during the 1870s. However, Alan Bennett does not directly condemn nor redeem Hector in the play, allowing the audience members to make their own judgement whether or not to criticize Hector’s character and his actions. Nicholas Hynter, director of the History Boys film, attended a school not unlike the one in Bennett’s play but confesses “even in the 70s we would have found casual homophobia disgusting”, confirming that the portrayal of homosexual relations between the pupils and teachers to be an abnormal aspect of school life. The History Boys is an-almost fantasy creation of a world where the boundaries between teachers and students do not coexist and the views and values of a normal society are not upheld. The casual representation of homosexuality in the play to be, to a certain extent, accepted into society could be interpreted as Bennett’s way of addressing and subverting the controversy and negativity that was associated with public homosexuality in the 1970s.

The boys’ responses to Hector’s sexual harassment is notable and tells the audience that the boys have come to accept Hector’s behaviour as one of his many literate eccentricities and his defining quality that they endure as if it were a ritual and an inevitable occurrence in their everyday school life. The way in which not one of the ‘history boys’ condemns or questions Hector’s sexual behaviour presents a mutual bond of trust and loyalty they share. This is first shown to the audience in the French scene, when the boys help Hector cover up what was a scene at a brothel, due to the Headmaster’s sudden entrance into the room where Dakin is “sans ses trouseurs”. The content of the scene is very sexual and thus highly inappropriate for boys of their age, further demonstrating Hector’s unsuitable teaching and misunderstanding of the legal and moral boundaries that should exist between himself and the boys in a school setting. Furthermore, Bennett’s principal purpose of the French scene is to serve as an aspect of comedy to the audience through the demonstration of role-play and bawdiness within the characters. Hector’s pedagogical friendship and the camaraderie between him and the boys against their common enemy of the headmaster are also further enhanced by this particular scene in the play. The boy’s judgement about Hector’s sexual desires gives them power over him that they refuse to use, despite how they know outside of school he would be perceived as ‘perverted’. In their acceptance of Hector in that role, the boys seem preternaturally wise, and perhaps Bennett’s intellectually sophisticated construction of the History Boys with their sharp wit and ability and grace to negotiate in class, means they are easily identifiable to the teachers. Thus, the audience does not feel so quick to condemn the breach of boundaries between the teachers and students.

The character of Irwin is introduced to the Sheffield grammar school by the Headmaster to “polish” the Oxbridge history candidates and give them an “edge” to help them gain entry into Oxford or Cambridge, simultaneously positioning the school higher on the League tables (much to the results-driven headmaster’s satisfaction. It is apparent that almost immediately Irwin takes a fondness for the extrovert student Dakin, a ringleader among his friends and a “handsome man” who uses the comedic device of mockery to make Irwin purposely feel uncomfortable by continuously referring to him as “sir”. Like Hector he is a homosexual and is also perilously attracted to Dakin. However, Irwin rejects any connection to Hector’s sexual desires after Dakin questions, “is it that you don’t want to be like Hector?” Irwin can be perceived as the young pragmatist, whose modernised teaching methods and young age are in stark contrast to Hector’s old idealistic and romantic views; his response and relationship with Dakin, in particular, differ.

While Hector’s approach to the boys is much more physical, Irwin seeks a relationship with Dakin and feels uncomfortable with his sexual ambiguity and innuendos in the ending scenes of the second act. Dakin’s character points out Irwin “still looks quite young” and therefore that the characters are not that different in age. This arrangement further suggests to the audience that the sexual tension between Irwin as a teacher and Dakin a student is acceptable through Bennett’s presentation of homosexuality as a normal aspect of school life. Evidently Irwin’s modern style reflects his modern views and the changing morality of society and thus he understands why a boundary must exist between a teacher and a pupil and why he cannot pursue such a relationship with Dakin. Despite Irwin’s evasive technique, with Dakin serving as comedic method in the play, he eventually succumbs to his sexual invitations by agreeing to “have a drink”, notably outside of the school environment where the illegality and morality of the relationship is less obvious. However, the sincerity of the homosexual relationship between Irwin and Dakin is questionable, as he vainly admits that he “couldn’t face the wheelchair” as a reason why he did not pursue his relationship with Irwin, which tells the audience the relationship between the two characters was merely physical and provides the audience with an insight into their shallow personalities.

Arguably, moral resolution was concluded at the end of the play in the form of the motorcycle accident which crippled Irwin and killed Hector, perhaps suggesting the sexual abuse the teachers inflicted on the boys was the ultimate reason for the calamitous accident and had to happen to produce a ‘normal’ school setting for future generations. Within the portrayal of homosexual relations in The History Boys, although inaccurate and not a typicality of 1980s Britain, Bennett does not directly condemn the homosexual relations between the teachers and pupils. Through the subversion of the narrative, Bennett tells the audience how he would want homosexuality to be presented.

Where Duffy uses revisionism to re-evaluate alternative representations of femininity in history throughout ‘The World’s Wife’, Bennett encourages the reader to re-evaluate the nature of history through Irwin’s revisionist versions of it, so introducing the idea of historiography, whereby historical accounts are dependent upon personal experiences or cultural context. Duffy deliberately distances her characters from sentimentalised idealism regarding the role of the female protagonist, creating ‘real’ voices of suppressed female voices through her use of the dramatic monologue form. However Bennett presents subjunctive historiography through the characterisation of Dakin, leaving the reader to question how minor changes in historical events may significantly impact the route of history. Dakin seems to follow Hector’s focus on the constant questioning of the alternate outcomes of history, musing on both alternate and subjunctive history (“It’s subjunctive history. You know, the subjunctive? The mood used when something may or may not have happened. When it is imagined”). Dakin finds enjoyment through merging both Irwin and Hector’s arguably conflicting perspectives to history. Duffy also uses subjunctive history to convey a provocatively sympathetic portrayal of the English serial killer, Myra Hindley, within the poem ‘The Devil’s Wife’. Here, Duffy utilises revisionism and subjunctive history to provide possibilities of what may have occurred in the ambiguous events of ‘The Moors Murders’ (1963-1965). Duffy is subversive through her depiction of Myra Hindley as a victim, rather than a violent criminal, through her objectification and public judgement of her appearance and voice (a subject of great focus amongst media and the public eye of the 1960s): “Nobody liked my hair. Nobody liked how I spoke”. Duffy’s use of repetition of “Nobody”, combined with emphatic nature of the sentences, instil sense of victimisation. The objectification of Myra Hindley encourages the reader to question and revise what it is to be a woman in an intensely judgemental modern society. Duffy subtly uses revisionism to criticise society and the media for their frivolous judgement of Myra Hindley, re-writing history by illustrating Hindley as a victim.

Contrastingly Dakin presents a striking example of subjunctive historiography within ‘The History Boys’. This is reflected through his re-interpretation of the day of Winston Churchill’s election to be Britain’s Prime Minister, as a result of Halifax not being present (the more likely candidate to be elected: “Halifax more generally acceptable”- Dakin) as he was at the dentist. This is a prime instance where events in history would have unfolded in to creating alternative results, showing how Bennett is emphasising the concept of the incidental nature of history. Dakin’s obsession with subjunctive history and the possibilities of different events is illustrated through his enjoyment in considering the minor details of the past: “If Halifax had had better teeth we might have lost the war”. Bennett’s use of the conditional “if” highlights the interchangeability and probability associated with subjunctive history. Bennett’s comedic writing highlights deeper concepts regarding alternate history and the consequences, chance and scenarios that determine history.

Throughout the play Bennett has made Dakin to appear the most confident and self- assured out of the boys but the audience later find out that this is just an act to cover up his vulnerability. An underlying theme in the history boys is sexuality and throughout the play the audience see that Posner is the only boy that is completely open about his sexuality and struggles with the stigma in 1980’s. Posner and Dakin both have different personalities that contrast with each other but I think that their emotions in the play are undermined which has led me to feel sympathy for them.

Dakin is commonly seen as a straight alpha male character. With little observation Bennett makes Dakin come across as a shallow and self-absorbed character but in reality, he uses this to hide his insecurities and vulnerability. In the first few parts of the play he talks about his relationship with the headmaster’s secretary, Fiona.’ She’s my Western Front’¦ and the beauty of it is, the metaphor really fits. I mean, just as moving up to the front-line troops presumably had to pass the sites of previous battles.’ Bennetts method is to give Dakin an extended war metaphor to refer to his one-sided relationship with Fiona. The sentence ‘moving up to the front-line troops.’ Suggests that Dakin only sees Fiona as land to be conquered. This makes me feel pity on Dakin as further on into the play we find out that he only boasts about Fiona to try and justify his alpha male character to his friends and objectifies her to add on to the illusion of him being a dominant heterosexual male. This adds on to me feeling sympathy for him because behind the mask of confidence he has made, is a young boy who is possibly struggling with their sexuality. Through the play Bennett shows Dakin slowly express his feelings for Irwin. But he only uses little hints such as. ‘bring a little sunshine into his life. It’s only a wank, after all.’ This paints a picture to the audience that Dakin does find Irwin attractive and likes him in a sexual way, but doesn’t want anything serious to escalate from it.’ bring a little sunshine into his life.’ Shows that Dakin is still trying to be seen as an arrogant, self-centred character by the rest of the boys. I think Bennett’s method is to make the audience more aware of Dakin’s sceptical sexuality. It also points to the fact that Dakin needs help as he is struggling with his sexuality since he makes it into a joke about ‘bringing a little sunshine into his life.’ To attempt to conceal his vulnerability and reassert the dominance back to him.

Posner is a representation of what it is like to be an openly homosexual boy in the 1980s, Bennett expresses Posner as an isolated and helpless teen. ‘I’m a Jew. I’m small. I’m homosexual and I live in Sheffield. I’m fucked.’ In this, Bennett uses short sentences I think he uses this method as it emphasises the anger of how Posner feels and makes the audience feel sympathy as it draws attention to the hassle Posner goes through and what he will encounter in the future. This could be one of Bennett’s methods to try foreshadow a unfavourable future for Posner. The repetition of the word ‘I’m’ connotes that Posner has a lot of hatred towards himself and highlights the fact that he is a lonely and detached character plus the fact that he is going through these problems alone. This makes me feel sympathy for Posner as it displays how much of an outcast he is feels compared to the boys moreover it helps the audience envision how hard life is like to be in Posner’s shoes: an openly gay teen in the 1980s. in the play Posner illustrates the feeling of not being at home and amplifies this by reciting the ‘drummer Hodge poem.’ Bennetts method in this is to give Posner a poem which is used to reciprocate how he is feeling. A line in the poem says ‘its homely northern breast and brain grow to some southern tree.’ This is about not feeling at home which links to how Posner feels. I also think Bennett in this scene tries to show a close relationship between hector and Posner, Posner being a stand in for drummer Hodge in the conversation and hector for the poet Thomas Hardy. Posner is a boy navigating his own difficulties in life, while hector is a skilled interpreter of literature, giving Posner some guiding principles to live by. In this scene of the play both of the men discuss their frustrated desires, where they share the same feeling of failure and being a social outsider, I think this is largely because of their homosexual desires. Bennett shows in this scene that Posner looks up to hector as a role model and this makes me feel empathetic for Posner as this is one of the many scenes we see of him expressing a glimpse of how he feels and how sad his life is.

Furthermore, this leads into act 2 when the audience find out the inadequate fate Posner ended up with. In the scene, Mrs Lintott turns to Posner, who she says is the ‘only person who truly took everything to heart.’ Posner lives a reclusive life in a cottage, having ‘periodic breakdowns.’ He reads a lot at the library, and lives a shadow life online, and has many friends. This suggests that Posner remains an outsider and doesn’t balance the drive for worldly success that Irwin tried to instil in him but has obviously understood hectors teachings in a way that the other boys do not. This makes me feel sympathy for Posner as it adds on to the fact he is still unhappy and alone, plus it shows that he is still not accepted in society and doesn’t fit in. ‘he has a host of friends’¦ though only on the internet.’ This emphasises my point of Posner still not being able to fit in and shows how he has detached himself from reality, isolating himself from social interactions with people. I think Bennett’s method is to portray the fact that openly gay homosexuals in the 1980s were withdrawn and lonesome since this was a topic that was dismissedignored back then.

In both texts, gender and sexuality are presented by the authors as something which is supposed to aid the students in their learning and is a natural component of their education. Miss Brodie, for example, continuously emphasises how important being in her ‘prime’ is to her girls as it is the height of her beauty and allure as a woman. Spark portrays sexuality through this as we are made aware of Brodie’s affairs with Lowther and Lloyd and, as a result of these, Sandy and Jenny begin to explore concepts about sex which shows how Miss Brodie’s teachings about her ‘prime’ lead to the girls’ knowledge expanding regarding sexuality. The highlighted importance of sexuality by Miss Brodie shows how she is not only educating the girls about facts and history, but also helping them to mature from a very young age (which can have grave consequences that we see later through Sandy’s betrayal). Meanwhile, Bennett links sexuality and intelligence throughout the play, as seen through Dakin’s comparison of his seduction of Fiona to the First World War, “she’s my western front.” Through this metaphor we see that the boys are not only making connections between their education and their personal experiences, but also how their sexuality is influencing the way they take in information or apply their knowledge to certain topics. Bennett uses sexuality to present how the boys are maturing and growing, illustrating that it is an important and necessary part of their education which is further echoed in Hector’s declaration that education is an ‘erotic act.’ This also presents the idea that knowledge is a stimulant for sexual desires, emphasising the connection between their education and the boys’ sexuality as with the increase of knowledge, their sexual desires also increase.

The History Boys is a drama in the original form of a play. With it being written as a script to be acted out, we have to rely on the use of dialogue from the characters to convey the whole story. Due to this, it is possible we miss certain details (regarding the way the actors are told to embody a direction) but we are able to see each character’s individual personality and how each of them are affected by the education they receive. For example, Dakin and Posner are two very different characters, with Dakin being proud of his sexuality (flaunting it and bragging about his seductive endeavours) and Posner relying on poetry to convey and solidify his feelings. Posner is also very unsure about his sexuality and seeks out help from Hector, which shows us that the boys look to their teachers for education in more areas than just the curriculum. It enforces the idea that the boys’ sexuality is a key factor in their education and suggests that, in order for the boys to be fully and properly educated, they must also learn about and explore their sexuality. The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie is written in prose form, so Spark is able to reveal a lot more information to the reader regarding the characters’ inner feelings or details about their personalities, rather than showing it through dialogue. Spark also uses prolepsis quite often in her writing, thereby revealing future events to the reader. An example of this is the repetition of the mention that Rose Stanley “later had a great reputation for sex.” By revealing this to the reader at the beginning of the story when the girls are still in school, the novel hints towards the girls’ sexuality being more prevalent in shaping them as women than their education. It puts an emphasis on the idea that, above all else, sexuality is the main aspect of a person that needs developing, even before education.

Characters in both texts are shown using the setting of the school to their advantage when exploring their sexuality, which the writers may have done to show that exploring their sexuality is inevitable even when in such a separated or ‘conservative’ place. In The History Boys, this is seen through Dakin’s affair with Fiona and later through his pursuit of Irwin when he asks to ‘go for a drink.’ This gives the idea that since the students are always only around each other and being made to learn, they begin to develop feelings of attraction for their superiors (in terms of the staff members). Where this should be seen as wrong since it is a relationship between a student and a teacher, the boys may not know any different due to their interactions with Hector and his groping of the boys. Similarly, we see this kind of relationship in The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie when Sandy has an affair with Mr Lloyd, the art teacher. Whilst this can be seen as part of Sandy’s betrayal of Miss Brodie, it also shows that Sandy has been influenced by Miss Brodie not hiding her affairs and which leads to Sandy becoming curious and exploring her own sexuality with the man in love with Miss Brodie. In both texts, it seems as though the school setting is the only place that the students get the chance to explore their sexualities (or rather, with people linked with education) and ideas about sex and that it also increases the students’ curiosity regarding this. With Miss Brodie talking so openly about her ‘prime’ and Hector groping the boys, it seems natural for the students to begin opening up their sexualities and admitting their sexual desires from an early age, which perhaps even happens without their knowledge – and this can be dangerous and lead them to do reckless things, such as having affairs with their teachers.

The History Boys is set in the 1980’s, when the age of sexual consent was sixteen (for heterosexuals, for homosexuals this was twenty one years old). Going by this law, Hector’s actions, whilst still being highly unconventional and wrong, would not be punishable by jail. However, this had reformed to sixteen for all upon the drama’s release. Regardless, in the United Kingdom, anyone under the age of eighteen is considered a child, highlighting Hector’s paedophilia and no doubt disturbing the audience upon the drama’s release in 2004. His ‘groping’ of the boys at the time of publication would have been highly criticised, though in the 1980’s the conduct would have been looked down upon in the sense that it was a teacher being involved with a student – not a teacher harassing a child. This emphasises the idea that the boys’ sexualities are being explored at too early an age and can be seen as being forced out of them. This is what results in Dakin becoming attracted to his teachers to the point that he suggests Irwin and himself become sexually involved. Furthermore, due to the boys being considered adults in the setting of The History Boys, the actions of Hector are more normalised, even to the extent that Dakin willingly gets back onto his motorcycle and accepts the risk of being ‘groped’, if only ‘for old times’ sake.’ Bennett shows the normality of sexuality and how it links with education through the character of Hector and his actions with the boys, but in a deeply disturbing way that brings a sense of disgust and discomfort to the reader.

Alternatively, Spark presents Miss Brodie as a woman who teaches for influence and control rather than directly for sexual awakenings, those being more of a by-product from her teaching methods and the relaying of her personal stories. The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie is set in the 1930’s, a time when Hitler was rising to power and Mussolini, one of the men Miss Brodie admires, was leading the fascist party. We can see some fascist qualities in Miss Brodie herself, presenting her as a danger to ‘her girls’ with her idea that if you ‘give [her] a girl at an impressionable age…she is [hers] for life.’ This suggests that Miss Brodie knows she can manipulate the girls and uses it to her full advantage, often reminding them of the fact that they are ‘women’ who ‘must’ recognise when they are ‘in one’s prime.’ With Spark portraying Miss Brodie this way, it gives the impression that Miss Brodie is of course dangerous and also creates a sense of worry for the girls. We also see similarities between the men like Mussolini and Hitler as during their reigns they both brainwashed and manipulated the people in their parties and countries to follow their ideals, just like Miss Brodie is doing to ‘her girls.’ By branding them as her own, Miss Brodie is putting a sort of tag on the girls that they belong to her, like objects, which would be against the beliefs of women being strong and independent that Miss Brodie carried and also that feminists today advocate. Spark uses these possessive pronouns to convey Miss Brodie’s attachment to the girls and her determination to make prodigies out of them, as though she is building her own party or ‘army’ of sorts consisting of girls just like her. On the book’s publication in 1969, the public may not have reacted well to this portrayal of Miss Brodie as the effects that the rule of Hitler and Mussolini had on people throughout the world was extremely negative and may have impacted people in the UK as well.

Feminist literary theory suggests that women deserve to be equal to men in all aspects of life, which is scarcely shown in most older forms of literature. Spark portrays feminism in The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie, though in a slightly contradictory way. Miss Brodie is the epitome of a confident, independent woman who embraces her gender and basks in her own ‘prime’ whilst also shaping the minds of young girls into the way she thinks. She encourages the girls to ‘recognise’ their own ‘prime’, encouraging them to embrace their identity as women. Whilst doing this, however, Miss Brodie also brandishes the girls as her ‘own’, like objects she wishes to control, which is against what feminism calls for. It is exactly the same as women being controlled by men, though in a more subtle way, which can confuse the reader as it doesn’t seem right for a woman who believes in feminism to contradict her own beliefs by doing this. Miss Brodie is also depicted as a great leader for her girls, despite Sandy’s betrayal of her, and is a good symbol for non-conformity. Through Miss Brodie’s teachings and her efforts to make the girls the ‘crème de la crème’, we see how exactly she is raising the girls to be exactly like her as Mr Lloyd begins to paint her girls, yet somehow the portraits always, ‘in a magical transfiguration’, resemble Brodie. This suggests that Miss Brodie was a strong female presence in Lloyd’s life that left a great impact and emphasises the likeness of Miss Brodie to the girls.

In The History Boys, Bennett portrays the lack of equality for women in the 1980’s through Mrs Lintott’s character. Mrs Lintott is referred to as ‘Totty’, a nickname which implies a sexually desirable girl or woman, which detracts from her position of authority as a teacher to the boys and a professional worker in general. The use of the nickname can be used to stereotype women as nothing more than objects of sexual desire, suggesting that even in schools the female teachers are still treated as though they have no other purpose than to please. It is also suggested that Mrs Lintott has less value than the male teachers as the headmaster wants a completely new teacher who is ‘young’ and has a ‘moustache’ rather than allowing Mrs Lintott, who knows the boys, to teach them herself even if she may be just as qualified. The idea that a man would be a better teacher than a woman emphasises the lack of equality between the genders and shows that gender was a very important aspect in school life; a man would help the students advance more than a woman would. The fact that the students are repeatedly referred to as ‘the boys’ enforces the stereotype that ‘boys will be boys’, which was used to excuse the degradation of women through sexual harassment and also the undermining girls and women. Dakin’s own degradation of Fiona with his statement that her body is ‘ground’ to be ‘reconnoitered’ shows this element of boyish misogyny and the way women were only regarded as important when it came to sex or when they would boost the appearance of a man, like a trophy. Mrs Lintott voices her view on this when she says that history is just ‘women following behind with the bucket’, again highlighting a stereotype that women are made only for cleaning and taking care of men. Bennett is using gender here to display a clear hierarchy that has been dominant for many years in the education system and is now being demolished and proved wrong as women gain deserved equality with men.

In conclusion, both texts present the clear idea that gender and sexuality have more importance in education than just general facts and knowledge through the exploration of the students’ sexual personas which are influenced by not only their surroundings, but the adults who are teaching them. In The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie, the eccentricities of Miss Brodie’s character and her willingness to show the girls how to embrace their identities causes the girls to grow up somewhat in a similar way to her and experiment with their sexuality throughout their school life. The girls are also never told by Miss Brodie that they will be looked down upon because of their gender, but that they should take pride in being a woman and utilise their own ‘prime’. This is contrasted in The History Boys, however, when Mrs Lintott admits that she is seen as lesser due to her gender. Despite this, both authors successfully convey the primacy of gender and sexuality over education and how it is a natural and necessary part of education.