There are many themes are found in the John Osborn’s play “Look Back in Anger” Some majors themes are going to be discussed below. Class Struggle and Education: Class struggle or Class consciousness is also a dominating theme in the play. Jimmy's anger is directed towards the member of the upper class to which his wife belongs. He wages a constant battle against the upper class and treats his wife as a "hostage". Through Jimmy, the underprivileged British youth responds to the structure and spirit of the Welfare state. By bullying his wife he wants to take revenge on the upper middle class which he detests. He wanted the "hostess" to submit to his class culture and to do so he expects her to disown her past through a purgatory of suffering and humiliation. Jimmy regards himself as the representative of the "working class" On behalf of the working class he declares a war on the upper middle class. The target of his attack is Alison's mother who represents the upper middle class. He seems to take pleasure on attacking Alison's mother in the harshest possible language. Jimmy together with Hugh raids the houses of Alison's friends and relatives in an attempt to humiliate Alison and which they consider to be a war tactic. He is inspiring in his attack on his wife's family, and Helena too becomes the target of his vicious attack some time. His grudges against the upper class comes from his feeling of being deprived of a
suitable job in spite of being highly educated. The intellectual genius in him rebels against what he feels in a social injustice.
Suffering and Anger vs. Complacency: Suffering and anger are highly associated with lower class in the play, and complacency with upper class. Jimmy believes that lower class people, who have suffered as he has, have an insight on the world that upper class people lack. He berates Alison for lacking “enthusiasm” and “curiosity.” He suggests that her complacency makes her less human, less connected to life than he is. He sees this suffering and anger as an important part of his identity. At a climactic moment in the play, Alison says of Jimmy, “don’t try and take his suffering away from him—he’d be lost without it.”
In the end, Alison finally experiences the suffering that Jimmy thinks she has been lacking: she loses their child to a miscarriage. This, she believes, forces her to experience the fire of emotion that Jimmy had always wished she had. But the play leaves us unsure whether their suffering will actually lead to any redemptive knowledge.
The circular structure of the play—the beginning of the first and third acts mirror each other—undermines the sense that Jimmy’s life is really as dynamic as he suggests that it is. He seems to be stuck in a routine. Osborne’s voice in the play, seen in his stage directions, also tells us that Jimmy’s fiery energy can be self-defeating. In his first stage direction describing Jimmy, Osborne writes, “to be as vehement as he is to be almost non-committal.” When Alison finally breaks down and tells him that she wants to be “corrupt and futile,” Jimmy can only “watch her helplessly.” The play ultimately suggests that Jimmy’s anger is an expression of his social discontentment and suffering, but not an answer to his problems. He doesn’t channel it in any political direction, joining a party or holding meetings or organizing his similarly angry friends, or even conceive of any way that it can be channeled. Though it springs from a moral fervor, it dissolves into a diffuse attack on many fronts, rather than pointedly targeting and taking down any oppressive systems.
Disillusionment and Nostalgia: Look Back in Anger is the archetypical play of the “angry young men” movement in British theater, which was marked by working class authors writing plays about their disillusionment with British society. In Osborne’s play, we see this in Jimmy’s sense of political emptiness. Jimmy complains that, in the Britain of the 1950s, “there aren’t any good, brave causes left.” ”Helena observes that he was born in the wrong time—“he thinks he’s still in the middle of
the French Revolution.” Jimmy’s angry fervor is out of place in modern society, and this leaves him feeling useless and adrift.
Other characters also feel a sense of nostalgia for the past, but for different reasons: they long for an era characterized by a leisurely life for rich Britons and greater worldwide power for the British Empire. Many of these themes of nostalgia revolve around Alison’s father, Colonel Redfern, who had served in the British army in colonial India. Jimmy says that Colonel Redfern is nostalgic for the “Edwardian” past — early 20th century England, before World War I, when things were supposedly simpler and more peaceful.
In the end, the play argues that the characters’ disillusionment is legitimate. Post-war Britain was marked by a stagnant economy and declining world power, partly due to the fact that it no longer had many lucrative colonies around the world (India, where Colonel Redfern served, gained its independence in 1947). The play argues that these factors have left the country’s young people adrift and disempowered. Jimmy’s anger is therefore justified.
Both Jimmy and Colonel Redfern, from their different places in society, have nostalgia for a time when Britain was more powerful on the world stage. The passing away of Britain’s imperial power is thus painted in a negative light—and though Look Back in Anger voices a revolutionary social critique of class conditions in England, it stops short of criticizing Britain’s exploitation of its colonies. Instead, it argues that the decline of the empire has led to the disenfranchisement of the men of Osborne’s generation, and gives those disenfranchised citizens a strong and angry voice in Jimmy Porter.
Gender : During World War II, many British women had stepped into new roles in the labor force. After the war ended, most were expected to move back into their traditional roles in the household, but many still held jobs outside the home. The play takes a conflicted view of gender that parallels these shifting dynamics. On the one hand, Jimmy’s angry, destructive, and typically masculine energy drives much of the action and dialogue. On the other hand, women are given agency, and female characters act in their own interests, independently of men (most notably, both Alison and Helena leaves Jimmy). Femininity in the play is highly associated with upper class, and masculinity with lower class. This leads to clashes between the genders that also have an economic dimension. Sticking to conventional gender roles means sticking to the propriety and politeness of British society (which also means acting along with your class role). For example, in stealing Alison away from her family to marry her, Jimmy took on the traditional male role of a “knight in shining armor.” But, Alison says
that “his armor didn’t really shine much,” subverting this traditional gender role by adding a class dimension to it. Jimmy was almost heroic, but not quite. There is clearly something attractive in Jimmy’s virile, lower class masculinity, as first Alison and then Helena are drawn to him sexually. Yet there is something destructive in it as well, as both also end up leaving him. Further complicating the gender dynamics, women, too, are portrayed as having a destructive power over men. Jimmy says he’s thankful that there aren’t more female surgeons, because they’d flip men’s guts out of their bodies as carelessly as they toss their makeup instruments down on the table. He likens Alison’s sexual passion to a python that eats its prey whole. At the end of the play, he says that he and Cliff will both inevitably be “butchered by women.” The muddled gender roles in the play add to the sense of realism that made it such a sensation when it was first performed. Characters defy social convention. Alison disobeys her parents to marry Jimmy. Helena slaps Jimmy at the very start of their affair, and later walks out on him. An unmarried man (Cliff) lives with a married couple. He flirts with Alison, but Jimmy doesn’t particularly mind. The fluid and shifting gender roles in the play reflect the more fluid realities of post-War British society, portrayed for the first time in the traditionally staid and upper-class medium of theater.
Love and Innocence: Jimmy believes that love is pain. He scorns Cliff and Alison’s love for each other, which is a gentle sort of fondness that doesn’t correspond to his own brand of passionate, angry feeling. When Helena decides, suddenly, to leave him at the end of the play, Jimmy reacts with scorn and derision. Love, he says, takes strength and guts. It’s not soft and gentle. To some extent, Jimmy’s definition of love has to do with the class tensions between Jimmy and Alison. Alison tells her father that Jimmy married her out of sense of revenge against the upper classes. In asking her to leave her background, he laid out a challenge for her to rise to, and their passion was partly based on that sense of competition between classes. This subverts a traditional love story—Jimmy’s anger at society overshadowed his feelings for Alison, at least in her eyes. This reflects a broader loss of innocence in a generation of post-war Britons that had seen the hydrogen bomb dropped on Japan and 80 million soldiers and civilians die during World War II. Their parents and grandparents were able to grow up with some measure of peace of mind, but these characters (and the real Britons of their generation) cannot. This affects them even in fundamental parts of their domestic lives, like love and marriage.
Historical Importance (Realism) The aim of realistic drama is "putting ourselves and our situation on the stage". Look Back in Anger appealed to the audience of that time because of the immediacy of the subject matter. Osborne presented the contemporary scene on the stage and expressed the disapproval of the post-war youth of the society through Jimmy. By his command of contemporary idiom, his sharp comments on subject ranging from the "posh Sunday newspapers and 'white tile' Umnusities to the Bishops and the Bomb, Osborne caught the fancy of the audience of his time. The youth of his time identified themselves with Jimmy Porter, a dissatisfied, disgruntled young man who lashes out at everyone with his scathing comments. The hero represented the post-war British youth who looked around the world and found nothing right in it.