The late Jim Allen was not known for his restraint and The Spongers is perhaps his fiercest and most devastating attack on modern life. It centres on Pauline, whose husband has recently left her with huge debts which she is not entitled to assistance with from the state. She is trying to bring up four children, one of which has Down's Syndrome. Matters reach a critical stage when that child is moved into an old people's home as a result of council cutbacks. The real target of this play may appear to be the uncaring beauracracy who turn their backs on a woman trying desperately to raise her children against all odds, but in fact Allen is really attacking the public attitude that all people on state benefits are parasites. It is an unashamedly biased portrait, as Pauline (Christine Hargreaves) is depicted without any black side to her character, while the council representatives are all unattractive, unsympathetic cipers. Such is the tactic that dates back to the earliest of Ken Loach's works. The Spongers is in a way a celebration of all that was good about the filmed television play in the 1970s, with a huge cast, unflinchingly bleak and fiercely political. From the opening shots of an upside down Queen with the telling title underneath, this is a play prepared to say exactly what it wants. The ending is horrific, the acting is stunningly naturalistic. Where has television like this gone?
3 Reviews
The true and proper spongers
blacknorth18 May 2007
The Spongers is one of the triumphs and one of the shames of British television - triumphant because it succeeds in presenting the true state of social affairs in jubilee Britain, shameful because none of its frightening lessons have been learned by our society.
Jim Allen brilliantly demolishes the social consensus with his very simple conceit, comparing the British royal family to a poor single parent family in 70's Britain. And it is painful and harrowing to follow the fate of this family at the hands of social services against the background of nationalistic fervour created by the jubilee celebrations.
The ending is probably the most shocking event in television history, but was eclipsed at the time by tabloid uproar over the opening titles of the play, which (super)imposed a picture of the Royals beside the word Spongers. This controversy itself demonstrates Allen's concerns and serves to illuminate his lifetime themes and specifically the themes of this sadly almost forgotten play.
It appears British television no longer has a social remit and, though I hate to admit it, this play is probably partly responsible for that - it's just too powerful, too awkward, all too true. I hope someday it finds its way back into public consciousness.
Required viewing for every human person.
Jim Allen brilliantly demolishes the social consensus with his very simple conceit, comparing the British royal family to a poor single parent family in 70's Britain. And it is painful and harrowing to follow the fate of this family at the hands of social services against the background of nationalistic fervour created by the jubilee celebrations.
The ending is probably the most shocking event in television history, but was eclipsed at the time by tabloid uproar over the opening titles of the play, which (super)imposed a picture of the Royals beside the word Spongers. This controversy itself demonstrates Allen's concerns and serves to illuminate his lifetime themes and specifically the themes of this sadly almost forgotten play.
It appears British television no longer has a social remit and, though I hate to admit it, this play is probably partly responsible for that - it's just too powerful, too awkward, all too true. I hope someday it finds its way back into public consciousness.
Required viewing for every human person.
Victim Culture According To Hypocrites
Theo Robertson5 July 2013
This is a landmark teleplay that quickly entered British television legend . A social realist play that is angry , angry and ...well angry . Any other adjectives ? I think angry sums it up . Any other grammar ? How about a noun - victim ? Am I getting warmer ? Any other nouns ? How about culture ? Yes that's it angry victim culture which sums up THE SPONGERS perfectly , so much so you wonder if everyone involved in it did it all for free or if they did get paid they felt a noun called guilt ?
Christine Hargreaves plays Pauline a single mother of four children who falling deeper and deeper in to debt finds herself being ground down by the unfeeling bureaucracy of an uncaring capitalist state . How did she get in to debt ? Well the story needs a victim so writer Jim Allen can show the audience
1 ) Capatalism is bad
2 ) Jim Allen can shove his political views down the audiences throat
So apparently Pauline spent the rent money on her kids but it's never revealed on what . This is to manipulate the audience in to great sorrow for Pauline who never spends money on booze and ciggies . One wonder's if indeed Allen is aware of how little short supply there would be of sympathy if Pauline went out every night and smoked 40 cigarettes a day . None I imagine . It's also interesting if Pauline got a job she'd be able to pay off her debts . What about childcare you ask ? Is it not revealed she has strong parents who could babysit her children ? No doubt if she did get a job her dad would have a heart attack and it'd be the fault of the state . Remind me what political party was in power in 1977 ?
All this is a great pity because there are some things to admire from THE SPONGERS . The characters might be mere manipulative literary plot devise but the cast are uniformly Oscar worthy especially Hargreaves and give totally naturalistic performances . Special mention should also go to the average shot length which is phenomenally long to the eyes of a 2013 audience and must have been a nightmare for director Roland Joffre . All it takes is a cast member to fluff a line and that's the shot ruined . Incidentally Joffre would later go on to direct THE KILLING FIELDS set in 1970s Cambodia which was no doubt an Utopian paradise compared to Britain . Fair enough you'd risk starving to death and might get your head bashed in by the Khmer Rouge but at least you wouldn't get sent to jail for not paying your TV licence , especially if it's getting spent on salaries of professional socialist film makers
And that's always the problem of socially aware drama - it's invariably made by lovers of poverty - not lovers of the poor . Like ecclesiastical aid organisations who travel the world in search of victims to relieve their conscience they end up doing nothing of any worth except to make themselves feel better about themselves and jump on the outrage bus on behalf of other people . It is the victim culture portrayed and personified by hypocrites such as Laurie Penny and Owen Jones and offers no practical support of any kind to anyone . Interesting that no makes television plays about poverty stricken single mothers being jailed for not paying their TV licence because they can't afford to . That tells you something
Christine Hargreaves plays Pauline a single mother of four children who falling deeper and deeper in to debt finds herself being ground down by the unfeeling bureaucracy of an uncaring capitalist state . How did she get in to debt ? Well the story needs a victim so writer Jim Allen can show the audience
1 ) Capatalism is bad
2 ) Jim Allen can shove his political views down the audiences throat
So apparently Pauline spent the rent money on her kids but it's never revealed on what . This is to manipulate the audience in to great sorrow for Pauline who never spends money on booze and ciggies . One wonder's if indeed Allen is aware of how little short supply there would be of sympathy if Pauline went out every night and smoked 40 cigarettes a day . None I imagine . It's also interesting if Pauline got a job she'd be able to pay off her debts . What about childcare you ask ? Is it not revealed she has strong parents who could babysit her children ? No doubt if she did get a job her dad would have a heart attack and it'd be the fault of the state . Remind me what political party was in power in 1977 ?
All this is a great pity because there are some things to admire from THE SPONGERS . The characters might be mere manipulative literary plot devise but the cast are uniformly Oscar worthy especially Hargreaves and give totally naturalistic performances . Special mention should also go to the average shot length which is phenomenally long to the eyes of a 2013 audience and must have been a nightmare for director Roland Joffre . All it takes is a cast member to fluff a line and that's the shot ruined . Incidentally Joffre would later go on to direct THE KILLING FIELDS set in 1970s Cambodia which was no doubt an Utopian paradise compared to Britain . Fair enough you'd risk starving to death and might get your head bashed in by the Khmer Rouge but at least you wouldn't get sent to jail for not paying your TV licence , especially if it's getting spent on salaries of professional socialist film makers
And that's always the problem of socially aware drama - it's invariably made by lovers of poverty - not lovers of the poor . Like ecclesiastical aid organisations who travel the world in search of victims to relieve their conscience they end up doing nothing of any worth except to make themselves feel better about themselves and jump on the outrage bus on behalf of other people . It is the victim culture portrayed and personified by hypocrites such as Laurie Penny and Owen Jones and offers no practical support of any kind to anyone . Interesting that no makes television plays about poverty stricken single mothers being jailed for not paying their TV licence because they can't afford to . That tells you something
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
