Print

Print


MY BOY JACK –

On ITV 1 – 11th November 2007

 

 

 

 

My reactions to Sunday’s programme:

 

People I have spoken to outside the circle of Kipling enthusiasts were greatly impressed and profoundly moved.  They felt that the production brought out the tragedy and the pity of the Great War.  I felt it could have been even better if there had been more careful checking of facts and had not been jazzed up with fabricated events.

 

Generally, I felt the production was better than the stage play with a more believable Carrie Kipling, played by an American actress.  Still the actual story is, if anything, more dramatic and more poignant.  Why was the story jazzed up and weakened.

 

1

Kipling did not drive – why show him speeding in a Rolls Royce?

 

 

2

Visit to King George V before the war seems odd.  Did Kipling then know the King and if he did was he on such intimate visiting terms?  Also, would King be in uniform in peace time?   The King and Kipling for the most part were abstemious – would the King have offered whisky in the morning?  Also the King was most unlikely to be used as a channel to Kipling from Asquith.  King comes across as bellicose but in fact there was some evidence that he and his cousins, the Kaiser and the Tsar tried too late to intervene to halt the move towards European war.

 

3

Did John ever apply for the Navy in wartime?  I thought his eyesight was hopeless for Naval standards.

 

4

Surely Lord Roberts was not a complete invalid.  He was well enough to visit the Army in France in 1914 where he died of pneumonia.  Would Kipling have addressed him as “Bobs”?  Kipling was in great awe of the Hero of Delhi.

 

5

Kipling had health crisis after John enlisted.  Why was this not mentioned?  It was very important in Kipling’s life.

 

6

Kipling was on journalistic tour in France when John came home on embarkation leave.  The story of John calling up the stairs as he left, as related by Carrie, is more poignant than the farewell from his father as presented in the play.

 

7

Was John able to see well enough to shoot accurately by fixing his glasses to his nose?  Is the story supported by Army records?

 

8

The story of the Irish’s soldier’s account of John’s last moments seems believable, but did this interview ever happen with the Kipling family?  Still, one can say a parable is not a lie.

 

9

Carrie, as portrayed, is believable as a strong woman supporting Kipling who perhaps was shattered by the realisation that John’s death may have been caused by his intervention to secure a commission in the army.

 

10

Final interview with King and discussion of death of King’s son – Prince John? Surely this was kept secret.  Prince John had Down’s Syndrome, or something like it, and died with his carers.  Again, a most improbable meeting which does not, to me, help the story.

 

11

As only an occasional visitor, the Bateman settings did not seem too bad, but the film would have been better if the National Trust had felt able to agree to shooting on site.  From what one hears, the damage done by movie crews, the National Trust decision was probably sensible.

 

 

Notwithstanding the mistakes in detail which could so easily have been avoided, I felt the overwhelming sense of tragedy of a family caught up in the consequences of war, but sensible checking of the facts would have resulted in an even better production. 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Aidin

13 November 2007