Review of Look Back in Anger

"Look back in Anger" was not an instant hit as a play.It took the transmission by ITV of a truncated version starring Richard Pascoe as Jimmy Porter to bring it to a wider less theatrically sophisticated audience and,by extension,popularise it.This action was also incidentally the intention of John Osbourne who,along with the others in the so - called "Kitchen Sink" movement was to reclaim the theatre for ordinary working people by writing about lives and situations that had some relevance to their own. The play was to some extent autobiographical as far as it reflected Osbourne's first marriage,but Osbourne himself was no Jimmy Porter , rather he invented Porter as a character to give himself a platform on which to articulate those views that no one would listen to if he personally was to express them. Once Porter was accepted as a "voice",Osbourne could happily say whatever he liked(and frequently did) without necessarily believing in any or all of it. The form of the play was reassuringly traditional - nothing of the Beckett or Brecht about it - but the content was viciously "anti - theatre". With Osbourne's known admiration for Music Hall and Variety it is tempting to see parallels between Porter and the great Tony Hancock. Both inveterate snobs,prone to stream of consciousness dialogue,world class ranters living in seedy digs with subordinate pals.Both these great creations talk the talk but ultimately fail to walk the walk. In using Richard Burton for the movie version Tony Richardson made a fatal - if understandable - error.Too physically beautiful,too "Actorish",paradoxically too well - known,too recognisably not an embittered University Man running a market stall in order to remain true to his principles and prejudices.And once your lead has been compromised everything else around it begins collapsing. Taking Porter away from his soapbox and out onto the street further weakens the film.The efficacy of the play is to a large extent dependent on the claustrophobic gloomy set. Mr Osbourne was not a poet of the working - class,he was a poet for the working - class,not the same thing at all.He may have had hated all that he believed England had become,but like Jimmy,he chose to do nothing about it.Instead,through his mouthpiece,he chose to bellow clever words that appealed to the Armchair Revolutionaries of half a century ago and still appeal to their counterparts today. The trouble is the same snouts are still deep in the trough and the same people are still out in the cold.And it's still deeds,not words,that count.