X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week. If you receive it, you’ll also find your subscriber number at the top of our weekly highlights email.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.spectator.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050. If you’ve only just subscribed, you may not yet have been issued with a subscriber number. In this case you can use the temporary web ID number, included in your email order confirmation.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

If you have any difficulties creating an account or logging in please take a look at our FAQs page.

Features

Why Ken Loach hasn’t made a decent film since Kes

He’s so keen to parade the virtue of those he feels have been robbed of a voice that his work sinks under the weight

31 May 2014

9:00 AM

31 May 2014

9:00 AM

‘If you want to send a message,’ said Sam Goldwyn, one of the men who invented Hollywood, ‘try Western Union.’ It is such a well-known remark one might have thought every film-maker of the past 50 years would have acted upon it. Not Ken Loach. After half a century of fighting the good fight on behalf of the poor, down-trodden working class, the grumpy Oxford graduate releases his latest film this week. Don’t all rush at once.
Jimmy’s Hall, it will surprise nobody who has followed Loach’s work over the years to learn, pits an Irish socialist recently returned from America against the local priest. The screenplay, as ever with Loach, comes from the fair hand of Paul Laverty, who is usually described as a Scottish ‘human rights campaigner’. Wake up at the back! They’re doing this for your benefit.

Yes, Loach is once more at his exercise. And once more the critics will roll out the usual phrases to honour him — the grand old man of British cinema, our very own iconoclast, and such like. The one word you won’t read, because it is considered poor form, is ‘bore’. Yet that is what he is. Loach is no heir to Powell, Lean, Hitchcock and Reed. He is a one-man wind farm.

To give him his due, he seems, a month before his 78th birthday, to have got the message. Speaking at Cannes last week, he said he wasn’t sure his films had deepened people’s understanding of working-class lives. Though, naturally, it wasn’t his fault. ‘They cannot stand working-class characters who speak with some knowledge,’ he said.

In this case ‘they’ were film critics. From what he has said in the past, however, it could be anybody. Americans, Zionists, Conservatives: Loach feels oppressed by them all. They all stand in the way of the master’s vision. Only one thing is for sure. Not many people, working-class or otherwise, want to watch his films. Even critics, one feels, see them out of a sense of duty.

[Alt-Text]


With one exception. In 1969, Loach made Kes, one of the finest films of post-war English cinema. Adapted from the novel by Barry Hines about a Yorkshire boy’s relationship with a kestrel (A Kestrel for a Knave), it still scrubs up well 45 years later. Brian Glover’s performance as the sadistic, cheating PE teacher (‘Casper, get off that crossbar!’) has become part of British folklore.

If only Loach had made more films like Kes. Instead, rather than showing, he made the bore’s mistake of opting to tell, with ever-diminishing consequences. Loachland occupies a world of permanent grievance, at home and abroad, with ‘issues’ getting in the way of the tale. Hidden Agenda was about Northern Ireland, Carla’s Song was set in Nicaragua, Land and Freedom took us to the Spanish Civil War. Tick, tick, tick.

There are good films to be made in these settings, and film-makers have made them. But Loach is so keen to parade the virtue of those he feels have been robbed of a voice (thereby parading his own virtue as the one person who can hear their song) that the films sink under the weight of so much unnecessary baggage. Think of what Jean Renoir intimated about class divisions in La Règle du jeu, and then watch a Loach film, and the chasm stretches wider than just the English Channel. Renoir was an artist. Loach is merely a propagandist.

Like many propagandists, he came from a cosy background. At Oxford, a friend of mine who was up with him remembers ‘a dandy, a Noel Coward figure. Never have I seen such a transformation.’ It’s not that uncommon. Joe Ashton, the former Labour MP who came from true proletarian stock, once mocked Tony Benn’s idolatry of working people with a remark that was intended to wound: ‘If he knew anything about them, he would know there are as many shits among the working class as any other group of people.’

It is palpably untrue in any case to suggest that working-class people have never been given a voice in English cinema. Films like Room at the Top, A Taste of Honey, A Kind of Loving, This Sporting Life, Saturday Night and Sunday Morning and The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner transformed our way of seeing the world as well as making stars of Alan Bates, Albert Finney, Richard Harris and Tom Courtenay. With Kes, Loach helped to add a verse to the chorus.

There is an irony here, a delicious irony in the week that Ukip have taken such a bold step in the political life of the nation. Had Loach kept his eye on the ball in the past two decades, he would surely have noticed that the things that truly affect working-class folk do not always correspond with the issues that people like Loach deem important.

By trying to speak on their behalf, Loach has revealed himself to be woefully out of touch. But it’s not too late. There is still time for the grand old man to tackle (as the socially engaged like to say) subjects like immigration and the rise of Islamism in our cities. Seen from a truly working-class perspective. If Loach bothered to find out what those people really thought, he might get the sort of unscripted shock that produces a memorable film.

Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.


Show comments
Close