h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Went to see this yesterday and thought it was great! I see the Independent critic (in The Information supplement) found it "quaint and dull" and thought the boys "all looked about 35" - I disagree.

Alan Bennett's script was delightful, full of little jewels, and although slightly reminiscent of 'Dead Poets Society' at times, it stopped short of the OTT saccharine-ness of that.

I'm a big fan of Frances de la Tour, and she didn't disappoint. Also thought the young actors playing the boys were very good, although, as my friend said, some of them were very underused.

Reminds you how good British cinema can be.

OOh glad you've seen it as one of the early opinion formers Annie. Was going to go next week then read a poor review in yesterdays Grauniad which was hung up on things that weren't in the script and the straight transfer from stage to screen. Sounded like TA criticism of Pip being too young for her age. [Must admit the Oxbridge Term was either defunct or on it's way out by my day.]

pj what do you mean by the Oxbridge Term? Michaelmas, Hilary and Trinity? Still going strong at the First University as far as I'm aware.

Hello, dagesh

PJ means the seventh term when people returned to school post-A Level to apply and prepare for an Oxbridge interview. That's what the boys in the play/film are doing, I think. I'm not sure when it was abolished but it still existed in the mid-seventies. O/h and I have just been talking about it. No girls in my school did it but we remember some of his fellow pupils doing it.

I would have loved to see The History Boys on stage, it's coming to Belfast at the end of the month but more or less sold out. The film's the sort of thing I might actually go to a cinema to see, despite the Grauniad's review.

Eilis

Thanks for that clarification, Eilis

After I'd written this, I heard the review on R4 (can't remember the name of the programme) - they were saying that they preferred the stage version, and found the film a bit static and wordy. I didn't mind that, particularly as the script was so good.

I had heard previously that Alan Bennett had been criticised for setting the story in the early 80s when the Oxbridge Entrance Exam(s) had been abolished, and ignoring current events e.g. the Falklands War, but it's difficult to satisfy everybody and there will always be criticism of a relatively modern 'period piece'.

Having said that, there were moments when I felt that it perhaps reflected Bennett's own experience in the 50s, rather than a realistic portrayal of the 80s - although I loved the role-playing in the French class (worth seeing for that alone IMO) - I did wonder whether 80s sixth-formers would have gone along with it.

Again I have a question!



Which exams were these? A sort of "general paper" with translations set of passages from Jane Austen to translate into Latin? Cos I wrote the Oxford Entrance Exams for French and German in (I think) 1986. So I'm presuming you're referring to a different exam altogether.

No, I think we're talking about the same thing dagesh - wasn't sure when they were discontinued. If you took them in 86, that part of the film must have been accurate - the boys were certainly preparing for a History exam.

Then they would have been reading Carr's "What Is History?". I had a friend who went to Corpus reading history.

<>

Above is from the minutes of a Commons Selecto Committee:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmeduemp/400/0070507.htm

see here for the context.

Eilis

Gosh Eilis - in essence what I was going to say over my cuppa but with full gravitas.

Yes I did mean the special Seventh Term. The old argument was that candidates for Oxbridge were required to be out of the ordinary and above the standardised learning which a dilligents A Level candidate could achieve. The Oxbridge Entrance Exams were held over several days I think and expected a proper original discussion with interview following.

However I would imagine that every private [public] school and most long established boys schools went big for the Exam - most state girls schools did not [whatever the standards achieved] unless they were partner schools to boys schools - no resources and an assumption that less affluent parents could barely afford to support kids past 15 anyway.

By my time those who were disadvantaged in this way were 'allowed' to apply on the basis of oustanding A levels [thus defeating the whole object of having them in the first place] but there was no proper acknowledgement that it was perfectly possible to be taught the extra techniques for Oxbridge, just as you could be taught to pass A level.

Eventually the exams shrivelled and ended because few schools in the comprehensive system had spare capacity for one term of intensive coaching and there could be no more pretence that only those who had already been selected by the education system at 7 or 11 or 13 were able to compete intellectually with those from fee-paying schools.

[In case this sounds rampantly socialist it reflects my teenage attitudes to the class/education divide in the late 1970s. Not sure I was too far wrong, and I am certain that just as there were and are truly good minds in Oxbridge colleges there were also generations of students whose parents had paid for educational opportunities which might have been better appreciated by any number of others, male and female.]

Without seeing the film of course I don't know whether any of this political maelstrom is communicated - (I can see why critics have pointed out that the setting is a representation of what happened in the 1950s when Bennet himself was a swotty schoolboy!}

Note to self: see the Film before opening mouth and inserting foot.

Hiya, petal!

Of course things have come round again and once more History candidates for Oxford have to take the "History Aptitude Test". I saw while googling for stuff on the seventh term that Westminster school has special Oxbridge classes just for prospective History candidates. Meanwhile youngest will be taking the exam in a fortnight. We've just downloaded the specimen and past papers and the marking scheme and together we'll look over them. We have a copy of "What is History?" lying about the house somewhere. I'm not sure if her big sis ever actually read it. "Why History Matters" is another one they're "supposed " to read.

Heigh ho. I hope all is well chez jam.

Eilis

[In case this sounds rampantly socialist it reflects my teenage attitudes to the class/education divide in the late 1970s. Not sure I was too far wrong,.....

An interesting point Petal Jam - I actually half suspect that I've spent the last three years compensating for/setting right exactly this situation for myself. I got C-streamed at my 11+, therefor no latin, and therfor law was a closed door to me. I still bitterly resent the primary school teacher who said of me at age 11 if Douglas is lucky he might get one or two o grades.

Lets hope I never spot his grave whilst in possession of a full bladder.


Douglas

<>

Scuse me while I splutter Eilis [I'll wipe up before leaving Annie!]

The major skills that you need are very close in fact to Law: viz the ability both to read swathes of secondary materials quickly and come out with an accurate balance of ideas and to read primary texts very closely indeed.

Everything is a Historical Document and How/Why Do You Frame the Question?

Yes - Cambridge applicants don't have to do this (yet), but a number of colleges, including mine, are running a pilot test which History applicants take at interview. Started last year - they have to read some source documents and write an essay.

It's on a par with the other tests which are gradually creeping back in - the Bio-Medical Admissions Test and the Law National Admissions Test (both used by a number of Russell Group universities) are other examples.

Since the majority of Cambridge applicants are predicted, or already have, at least three As at A-level, these tests are an attempt to help Admissions Tutors in the selection process. Some research has also been going on for a few years on the correlation between AS module scores and performance in university exams, and it seems likely that conditional offers in the current admissions round may include a requirement to achieve A grades in specific modules at A2.

Hello, Annie

Yes, there's a whole industry out there making plenty of money out of the BMAT, the LNAT and another one for medics:UKMat or something like that.

There aren't enough sessions here and some students have had to travel to Scotland to take them. While daughter was thinking about Law she realised that all local sessions except ones at 6.00am in the morning were booked-up and she would either have to do it at that hour or travel to another town to take it. They all appear to be done in those driving theory test examination places.

Here's a link to the HAT info if anyone wants to have a go!:


http://www.history.ox.ac.uk/prosundergrad/applying/hat_introduction.htm

Eilis

We saw the film yesterday, and greatly enjoyed it.

I wasn't lucky enough to see the original at The National - but I have listened to the radio version that was broadcast earlier this year, and the film loses very little of the cut and thrust wit.

Newsnight review was somewhat scathing - but I think they missed the point. The play itself provided small lessons on history, eg that the history writers do so with from their own perspective; and one of the characters points out that recent history is the most remote wrt to understanding it.

If Bennet choses to set his play slightly anachronistically - so what? We don't mind when Shakespeare does it - and although I wouldn't wish to embarass Alan Bennet by comparing him to the great bard, I don't see why theatregoers need apply double standards.

The newsnight critics went to town on Mr Hector's fumbling, saying that it couldn't have happened in the 80s. Well, to begin with, we all know that it could have - but in any case, perhaps they were taking the fumbling too literally.

My husband, who detested PE with a passion, liked the goading of the games master but he did go to an all boys boarding school that was very into sport, which he is not (which is the main reason I married him) - but that's another story

One of the things that I like about this country is that we don't take much notice of the critics. It is difficult for them to destroy a new production, as they can for Broadway productions. Our criticism is aroused by adverse comment - and we go along to judge for ourselves.

Must go now - a man is coming to pull down our garden shed - must make sure he doesn't demolish the garage instead.

Prue

I'm glad you enjoyed it, Prue.

The Sunday Times critic was quoted in the Guardian's Review of Reviews calling it "nothing more than the decandent fantasy of an ageing homosexual" which I think says more about the critic than AB.

Here's a link to an interview with AB in yesterday's Education Guardian:

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,1923646,00.html

Eilis

Thanks for that Eilis. A very interesting article.

For myself, I had considered that we can see Hector's fumbling as symbolic of the academic fumbling of some teachers - which is a form of abuse too. So pleased to read that both Hector and Irwin are meant to be largely symbolic.

I liked the comments that brings the whole thing down to earth by reminding us that The History Boys is a drama.

Drama tries to show a truth - and paradoxically, getting the facts slightly skewed is often the most effective way of doing this.

There is so much more I'd like to go on about - but will spare you the ordeal!

Prue

Very interesting article Eilis - thanks for the link!

I totally agree with what Hytner says about getting more bright state school students into top universities - MUCH more needs to be done to get them to apply, and to offer them the opportunities at school that will enable them to succeed.