The controversial character Helen’s actions do not end there. Another thing that would have astounded the audiences was her casual attitude to sex, for example she refers a few times during the play to men in a way that one probably would not do in front of one’s daughter – Helen: ‘I did see a lad hanging around here…handsome, long-legged creature – just the way I like ‘em.’
Helen’s relationship with Peter would not have been seen as so outrageous, but it was hardly a typical marriage. Although some audience members might have thought it was a good thing that Helen was doing the ‘decent thing’ and getting properly married, they might have thought she could have picked a more respectable man! Peter was a bit of a miscreant and had a dubious lifestyle. Another thing the audience would probably have disapproved of would be the way Helen abandoned Jo at quite a young age, to go off and get married.
Helen’s casual attitude to sex might still offend some modern audiences, although it would be generally accepted that it is one’s own choice and people are less judgmental about it today. Some people might be shocked at Helen deciding to marry Peter, and would think she had married for the wrong reasons, i.e. money, or to get away from her horrible flat. (Or indeed to escape the responsibility of looking after Jo.)
Helen’s treatment of Jo was never that of a particularly caring mother. She just left Jo to her own devices and did not set her a good example. Helen’s attitude is – ‘Still, she’s old enough to take care of herself.’ When Peter is at their flat, Jo is quite accepting that he is another of her mum’s ‘fancy men’, but that doesn’t mean she likes it. She hangs around and makes a nuisance of herself, until Peter asks if she is always like that. Helen replies that Jo can’t bear to see her being affectionate with anybody, to which Jo retorts, ‘You’ve certainly never been affectionate with me.’
Jo and Helen don’t have a typical mother-daughter relationship. For example, Jo calls her mother ‘Helen’ instead of ‘Mum’, and it also seems that their relationship is the wrong way around. Helen is the irresponsible one, trying to get Jo to drink whisky on several occasions, and Jo acts like her mother, always telling her off and tidying up etc. – Jo: ‘You always have to rush off into things. You never think.’
Helen’s treatment of Jo would still be found shocking today, if it were seen in the more modern television version. It would most likely be considered neglect and abuse to bring up a child in the same way as Jo. Jo would probably have been put into care today, but in the 1950’s it was considered to be the choice of the parent how they brought up their children, and child welfare laws were less enforced and strict.
The character Jo, however, is just as controversial as her mother. She raised several more issues in the play. When we first see Jo without Helen, she is with her boyfriend, a coloured boy. In the 1950’s, people were very prejudiced against black people and this would have staggered the audience immensely – to see a white girl associating with a black boy. Also the fact that they have obviously been having a relationship would have stunned the audience because in those days it just wasn’t done. Jo and the boy – Jimmie – would have faced immense discrimination and would not have been accepted in society. It is highly probable that part of Jo was just going out with Jimmie as a way of rebelling against her mother, as she knew it was a part of her life over which her mother had no control. We know that Jo doesn’t really care what other people think, and we can tell this from what she says, for example, when Jimmie is asking how her mother will react to them getting married, Jo says, ‘She’s not marrying you, I am. It’s got nothing to do with her.’
When we find out that Jo is pregnant, you can expect that the audience would be appalled, as not only is this a teenage pregnancy, and an illegitimate child, but it is also the result of a mixed-race relationship. This child could probably not be anymore of a social outcast.
Today, if a girl was in Jo’s position she would be helped, and there are many organizations and people willing to help teenage mothers. However, in Jo’s time no one would have wanted to make life easier for her but would have treated her in exactly the opposite way – as a social outcast. Today, teenage pregnancy is not exactly seen as a good thing, but it is accepted that it happens and that young mothers need help if they are going to be able to be part of society. The fact that the father of Jo’s baby was black would make no difference today either. Mixed race relationships are not such a big scandal to modern audiences.
Later in the play, after Helen has left to get married to Peter, we see Jo with a new character, Geof. He has been out with Jo, and as they reach Jo’s flat, she drags out of him, although without either of them directly saying it, that he is gay. Homosexuality was actually illegal in the 1950’s, and gay people were looked upon as freaks. We find out that Geof has been thrown out of his old flat, we assume because he is gay. This shows just how prejudiced people were and how they thought nothing of acting on these views.
Jo and Geof have a good friendship, and it seems like they are in a way so well suited because they are both social outcasts and can tell how the other feels. At the time though, it would have been frowned upon, because a young girl living with any man out of wedlock was unacceptable, and if he were gay – this would just be even more controversial.
People today accept that young people have the right to co-habit. To a modern audience, Jo living with Geof wouldn’t be a problem because it would just be like two friends living together, as they are hardly in a relationship. Even if Jo and Geof were in a relationship and living together, it would not be frowned upon as much as in the 50’s, although some people do still think it is wrong.
Also, the fact that racism and homosexuality were such big issues at that time makes people watching ‘A Taste of Honey’ today feel shocked at how intolerant people were only forty years ago. Today, prejudice against homosexuality and race is completely unacceptable. A modern audience would not find any gay or black people in a play or television program shocking. If they did they would be frowned upon by modern society – the direct opposite attitude of the 1950’s culture. I think this would be the greatest impact that the play would have on a modern audience, as opposed to in the 50’s when it was part of a new and controversial movement in theatre. It would make people really think about modern society and culture, and not to take for granted the freedom and acceptance we have today. It also makes one think about people we are prejudiced against today and realize that it will not always be so and to try and be more accepting. In ‘A Taste of Honey’ we are given an insight into these peoples’ lives – people who at the time would have been avoided and shunned from society. It makes us realize that these were real people and helps us to have a more personal approach when we think about prejudice in our country forty years ago.
In the modern television version of ‘A Taste of Honey’, certain parts of text from the original script have been omitted. This changes the feel of some of the scenes.
For example, there are some changes in the way Helen and Jo talk to the audience. At the beginning of the play, there are several instances of Jo and Helen speaking directly to the audience, and talking about each other – Jo: ‘She’d lose her head if it was loose,’ and Helen: ‘Oh! She gets me down!’ In a theatre this would involve the audience more and make them feel as though they were being brought into the confidence of the characters. However in the television version the ‘she’ is changed to ‘you’, so Helen and Jo are talking to each other only. This is probably because there is no live audience when it is being viewed on television. One could say that if a TV audience didn’t feel involved and interested they would just change channel or leave the room, whereas in a theatre one cannot do that, so it is more important that they feel involved and that they care.
The character Peter is seen in less detail in the television version. Several of his lines have been cut and therefore his character appears to be less important. This lack of detail does not really make a drastic difference to the story because a lot of Peter’s lines in the play served no real purpose other than to emphasise that he is a bad character, and that comes across clearly in the TV version anyway.
The casting of the television version is also somewhat questionable. The character of Helen seems to be portrayed as a much older looking woman, whereas when one reads the play it would seem that Helen would be more ‘tarty’ looking. For example, it says in the very first stage direction, ‘enter Helen, a semi-whore’. One would assume that in theatre to portray Helen as such, she would need to be dressed appropriately and look like a ‘semi-whore’. In the television version Helen does not look remotely like a ‘semi-whore’, but more like a comfortable old woman. This is unusual, but perhaps the television producers were trying to bring out the fact that Helen did have a bit of a motherly side by portraying it in the way she dresses, as it is not really seen in the way she acts in the TV version. However, we do see Helen being a bit more mothering at the end of the play when she is looking after, and fussing over, the heavily pregnant Jo.
The ending of the story is also changed in the television version. In the play, Geof leaves twice, in that he leaves once because he is uncomfortable being around when Helen comes back and he needs to get some shopping. He then returns but Jo does not know this, and Helen tells him to go for good, so he leaves. At the end of the play Jo still thinks Geof is coming back. However, in the television version, Geof only leaves once. This makes his leaving seem more impactful and dramatic to the viewer. It also leaves the possibility that he might come back.
The social context in which a play is seen can affect audience reaction greatly. Today, when we watch ‘A Taste of Honey’, we need to remember that it was written in a time when people were extremely prejudiced about things that we today do not consider to be a problem at all. We need to remember that this play was written to make people at the time aware of these important social issues and to make them think about their personal views.
‘A Taste of Honey’ had a great impact on the 1950’s audience, and it caused much discussion about the things that were important in society. However, if it was seen today as a play, and the audience did not know that it had been written in a time when the issues in it really were big issues, it probably would not make much of an impact at all, as the issues in it would not really be shocking to a modern audience. But the play should be viewed with remembrance of the social context in which it was written and then it will make a lasting impression on its audience, whatever time and whatever social context it is seen in.