Hancock resurrected

[johncorrigan]

Tut, tut. You'll be forgetting about Horace Bachelor and his Famous Infra-Draw Method next.

[Department One, Keynsham, spelt K-E-Y-N-S-H-A-M, Bristol]

Certainly Horace'll never be forgotten - after all he gets a mention from Viv on the original of this delight...not this one mind you!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AI4ekBi5Hhc

[Lat-Literal]

As the books about Hancock on my shelf reveal, this is my favourite radio comedy series of all time. I'm not sure the televised episodes have the same impact on me. Much was made of Tony's face and its natural comedic quality. While true, it was something he didn't particularly like. Of more significance is his verbal timing - clever and innovative - and the sheer strength and appropriateness of the supporting cast. Williams, James, Kerr and Jacques were all so right in their roles.

For an understanding of its appeal, which is what has been requested, three things. First, the writers Galton and Simpson, born in 1930 and 1929, were in that wave of culture that stemmed from experience in sanatoriums, National Service and elementary or grammar schools. I can't think of them without also thinking of writers like Sillitoe and Barstow, both born in 1928, and even cutting edge kitchen sink drama. These were men who were able to express an intelligent warmth in their work because of the hardship in their ordinary backgrounds. Oddly or not, that aligns with what happened in war among the older political classes from Attlee to Macmillan. It also follows on from the wartime experiences of Milligan and Speight.

Secondly, if Hancock the man was innovative so was the writing. There was a sophistication in its structure and content. One could say that it was difficult not to be innovative given that the broadcasting media were very much in their infancy but there are many examples of productions at that time which were essentially a glorified extension of the music hall.

Thirdly, the characters in Hancock while oddball and living in their own implausible little world are somehow so plausible as people they are more plausible than almost anyone else in comedy. Why? By the the early 1970s - and certainly by the late 1980s - radio and television were a big industry. There was a lot more knowledge of how a radio and television comedy production worked. Everything, of course, was becoming more corporate. Even listeners and viewers in their own characters assumed some of those self-knowing traits and that trend has continued ever since. But if everything - and everyone - is spun through a concept of product then what is lost is what people are really like in the absence of such things. People know it deep down, especially those in the second half of their lives. The series then is about what people are - or can be - at root. That is essentially the nature of the appeal. It is authenticity rather than nostalgia, whatever the affection for it.

Incidentally, I thought that the revival with unused scripts on Radio 4 was very good indeed. At least an eight out of ten.