Terence Rattigan: A Biography, By Geoffrey Wansell

Lesley McDowell
Saturday 16 January 2010 20:00 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

This portrait of the artist as a tortured soul privileges one kind of hidden pain over another. Geoffrey Wansell wants to understand why Terence Rattigan was "consigned to the footnotes of British drama" in the wake of the Angry Young Men. Why did the author of huge sell-outs such as The Winslow Boy (1946), The Browning Version (1948) and Separate Tables (1954) go out of fashion, when other similar writers, such as Noël Coward, managed to ride out the storm of kitchen-sink drama?

Wansell gives Rattigan's homosexuality as one reason (although that never hurt Coward in the same way). He argues that Rattigan lived an emotionally damaging secretive life, lest his mother, or the press, or the police discover his sexuality. But the picture we get of the theatrical world of the 1930s and 1940s is one full of homosexual men called "Bunny" or "Binkie" or "Puffin" (the latter being the director Anthony Asquith), and the actor and director Bryan Forbes refutes the idea that you could somehow operate in that world and not know who was homosexual and who was not. If there was a closet, it was a pretty big and obvious one.

More convincing as an explanation of Rattigan's hidden pain is that he seemed to feel he was a fake, and about to be "outed" as one at any moment. His lighter plays were just so much froth, he feared. Did he have it in him to be a serious artist? The success of his best-known plays helped a little, but when he reached for poetic greatness, such as with Adventure Story (1949), about Alexander the Great, his limitations were horribly exposed.

Rattigan was at his best when using English manners to hide painful secrets in his plays. And in our present culture of confession and exposé, he may seem more anachronistic to us than he actually is.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in