Comparison between Irwin and Hector

The play ‘The History Boys’ by Alan Bennett is about a group of sixth form boys who are studying in order to gain a place at an Oxbridge university. The teachers who are helping them to do this each have unique personalities and teaching styles that they have adapted to give something to the boys to get the best out of them. They are portrayed cleverly by the playwright to symbolise different aspects of a moral, or arguably immoral, society. Interestingly Irwin and Hector, who are both complex characters, have mirroring personality traits that manifest themselves in different ways but Irwin represents the more clearly defined and apparent type of dishonesty whereas Hector represents the more under-hand and malicious type that a reader can assume is the moral high ground.

Irwin’s outlook on education is that it is a game using short sentences, ‘it’s a performance. It’s entertainment’, and a cutthroat like competition, ‘you will be competing against boys and girls’, to really hammer home the point. He actively encourages the students to make it a game as well, ‘and if it isn’t, make it so’, as he sees education as strictly goal orientated and ‘for now’, meaning the short term rather than the future. On the other hand, Hector believes that ‘all knowledge is precious’ even if there is no ‘human use’ for it. He suggests that his philosophy is that ‘the pursuit of knowledge’, the word ‘pursuit’ suggesting a chase or a journey, is life long and never-ending. Irwin states that Hector is ‘not trying to get’ the boys through the examinations, suggesting that there is a lack of effort on Hector’s side and that ‘Hector never bothered’ with formal examinations. Despite the more laid back approach to education, it is interesting that Hector does say at one point that he ‘wanted them to compete’ and ‘show off’. This suggests that Hector is not that different from Irwin even if he portrays himself otherwise and says that this is the ‘worst thing’, acting ashamed instead of encouraging it like Irwin does. It can be inferred that he simply prefers the boys to learn in his way rather than Irwin’s.

It is interesting to note that the goal of Irwin’s teaching is to get the boys into higher education rather than to make the boys ‘more rounded human beings’ like it appears that Hector is trying to do. When Hector’s motives are further analysed, it is apparent that there is a hidden motive behind why he is trying to educate the boys. He ‘is trying to be the kind of teacher pupils will remember’ instead of trying to help the boys succeed. This portrays him as being selfish and suggests that instead of wanting what is best for the students, Hector has his own dishonest motives for why he is a teacher. Irwin seems prepared to do almost anything to get to the goal, openly promoting dishonesty and lies by telling the boys that ‘truth is no more an issue in an examination’. This means that truth has no purpose or intent when attempting to pass through another phase of life. As the teachers in the play often guide and prepare the boys for life in the adult world, he is essentially saying that they must lie in order to pass through different phases of their lives as this is what the adult world is about. This suggests he is a dishonest person, as Dakin later finds out when he investigates Irwin’s past, and is hiding under a pretence of lies by being emotionally distant from the students. However, Hector is not a beacon of moral example as he is morally ambiguous throughout the play, hiding behind arguments of morality such as ‘can’t you see that even to say etcetera is monstrous.’ Whilst Irwin is somewhat upfront and honest about his dishonesty, Hector tries to hide it behind an act. He does this by performing in front of his students, for example speaking in French instead of English and using quotes in place of saying what he truly means, rather than actually teaching them. This theatricality falls flat when the other teachers find out that he has been molesting the boys. Irwin also shows an interest in one of the students in a sexual way but the difference between Hector’s interest and his is that because Irwin is young and is encouraged by Dakin, it is more accepted despite still being on the same moral decline.

Although it may seem that Irwin is more conventional in his teaching methods than Hector, it is soon apparent that he mirrors Hector in his eccentricity by teaching in a style that is new to the boys. They both challenge the students, which is typically what a teacher must do, but the way that Irwin approaches topics is where his unconventionality shows. This is the main difference in attitudes that the two teachers have, distinguishing them from each other. Irwin believes that ‘the wrong end of the stick is the right one’, meaning that you must say controversial things in order to get the attention of the examiners. He says this as he wants the boys to ‘flee the crowd’, meaning popular opinion, and to make original arguments in order to participate in the History game. In contrast, Hector wants to avoid discussing controversial subjects as he feels like that ‘silence is the only proper response’ to an atrocity that he has not experienced.

Irwin is emotionally detached from his lessons, stating that examinations ‘are a fact of life’. The word ‘fact’ portrays that Irwin is distancing himself from any ‘feelings about examinations’ by talking about them in an almost cold and clinical way.  Despite this, Alan Bennett uses irony in the characterisation of Irwin to show one side of an intellectual argument, which says that you can spin truth or fact in order to make a point. Although Irwin is discussing fact, which is something very solid and truthful, he is continuously promoting deception and lying, which are very flimsy and untruthful, to the boys.  His teaching methods also echo his own personal stances as he encourages the boys to talk about History from ‘the side’, suggesting they take an uninvolved and unemotional stance, and to not be conventional in their arguments. The emotional distance when talking about historical tragedies does offend students as they realise that ‘the holocaust is just another topic’ to Irwin, as he speaks about a tragedy as being of a policy instated by a politician, but Irwin maintains that history is about distancing yourself and does not seem to care about the feelings of Posner who lost family in the war.

In contrast, Hector is emotionally driven and often relies on the boys as an emotional crutch: Posner ‘pats Hector’ on the back when he has an emotional breakdown in the classroom. This is only occurs when his act is stripped away though. In some ways, it can be said that Alan Bennett portrays Hector as emotionally detached too. Not being entirely transparent in the beginning by being over theatrical may be a way for Hector to retain his human side. Hector is also portrayed by the writer as being the opposite end of the intellectual spectrum which reasons that human suffering is the driving force of what makes the truth what it is. Alan Bennett also uses Hector as a tool to vocalise the emotional responses of the students, namely Posner who is horrified by the discussion as lost relatives during this period of history. Hector sees that Posner is’ speaking from the heart’ in the discussion as he sees that horrific historical events cannot be spun into another angle as it dehumanises tragedy, allowing it in a way to be just another statistic. He believes that suffering is the truth.

In conclusion, Irwin and Hector are not as different as a reader may like to think. Both have unconventional teaching methods and dishonest character traits. These are just portrayed in different ways. Irwin is simply more upfront about being dishonest whereas Hector is not as he prefers to characterise himself as a good person.