This extract depicts a argument in the Winslow home about Ronnie’s case set in the 20 th
century. Through the use of Catherine’s tone, the domestic setting and juxtaposition of
private verse public concerns, Rattigan’s social commentary is revealed. The scene sets
up many significant themes such as injustice, voicelessness and the position of women in
which this critiques government injustice, societal attitudes and the patriachy.
Significantly, Rattigan portrays Catherine as a feminist moral compass who challenges
societal attitudes subverting gender norms at the time. Catherine suggests that the
‘Government Department has ignored a fundamental human right’. This highlights the
wider injustice exposing the corruption of authority figures that often put on a facade of
protection and justice. After WWII, there was a growth in awareness of human rights after
the political and social outcomes in which this is reflected through Rattigan’s protest
against systemic issues which lead to hidden injustices. Yet, John reduces the case to a
‘fourteen year old kid and a five bob postal order’ in which this illustrates the differing ideas
surrounding importance. This sets Catherine as a foil to John who ignores individual rights
where Catherine is seen as morally integrated. Furthermore, this can be seen through
stage directions where Catherine talks ‘steadily’ and ‘with some spirit’ contrasting John’s
discomforting tone seen as he talks ‘cautiously’ and ‘reasonably’. This is significant as
Catherine challenges expectations of women passivity by taking on a principled leadership
role expressing her true opinions. Through Rattigan’s choice to present Catherine as a
woman who resists against patriachal norms it illustrates a movement for women’s rights
aligning with the suffragette movement in the 20 th century.
Furthermore, the use of the domestic setting and silence of Ronnie sets up a vulnerable
and innocent atmosphere. The choice of ‘Ronnie asleep in a chair’ who never speaks in the
extract juxtaposes the discussion that John and Catherine are having which shows how
those affected by injustice are often voiceless. Furthermore, the idea of Ronnie being
asleep in a chair reinforces the disorder of the household where a chair is associated with
something temporary and uncomfortable. This reflects how political protest can penetrate
through everyday life where protest against injustice needs sacrifice. Catherine questions
‘how do you know whats going on in his mind’ showing the tension of the case where the
sleeping boy juxtaposes the heated argument reinforcing how individual cases still matter.
The audience physically on stage would be even more aware of this but his silence would
mean they cant rely on his perspective and must judge based on others ideas. This is
significant as this could be Rattigan’s choice to mirror how real life injustice is experienced
through Ronnie’s voicelessness and how often decisions are made by people in power.
Rattigan also critiques social atittudes through the contrast of large wars with Ronnie’s
case. John compares Ronnie’s case to ‘a European war blowing up’ and a ‘civil war’ where
century. Through the use of Catherine’s tone, the domestic setting and juxtaposition of
private verse public concerns, Rattigan’s social commentary is revealed. The scene sets
up many significant themes such as injustice, voicelessness and the position of women in
which this critiques government injustice, societal attitudes and the patriachy.
Significantly, Rattigan portrays Catherine as a feminist moral compass who challenges
societal attitudes subverting gender norms at the time. Catherine suggests that the
‘Government Department has ignored a fundamental human right’. This highlights the
wider injustice exposing the corruption of authority figures that often put on a facade of
protection and justice. After WWII, there was a growth in awareness of human rights after
the political and social outcomes in which this is reflected through Rattigan’s protest
against systemic issues which lead to hidden injustices. Yet, John reduces the case to a
‘fourteen year old kid and a five bob postal order’ in which this illustrates the differing ideas
surrounding importance. This sets Catherine as a foil to John who ignores individual rights
where Catherine is seen as morally integrated. Furthermore, this can be seen through
stage directions where Catherine talks ‘steadily’ and ‘with some spirit’ contrasting John’s
discomforting tone seen as he talks ‘cautiously’ and ‘reasonably’. This is significant as
Catherine challenges expectations of women passivity by taking on a principled leadership
role expressing her true opinions. Through Rattigan’s choice to present Catherine as a
woman who resists against patriachal norms it illustrates a movement for women’s rights
aligning with the suffragette movement in the 20 th century.
Furthermore, the use of the domestic setting and silence of Ronnie sets up a vulnerable
and innocent atmosphere. The choice of ‘Ronnie asleep in a chair’ who never speaks in the
extract juxtaposes the discussion that John and Catherine are having which shows how
those affected by injustice are often voiceless. Furthermore, the idea of Ronnie being
asleep in a chair reinforces the disorder of the household where a chair is associated with
something temporary and uncomfortable. This reflects how political protest can penetrate
through everyday life where protest against injustice needs sacrifice. Catherine questions
‘how do you know whats going on in his mind’ showing the tension of the case where the
sleeping boy juxtaposes the heated argument reinforcing how individual cases still matter.
The audience physically on stage would be even more aware of this but his silence would
mean they cant rely on his perspective and must judge based on others ideas. This is
significant as this could be Rattigan’s choice to mirror how real life injustice is experienced
through Ronnie’s voicelessness and how often decisions are made by people in power.
Rattigan also critiques social atittudes through the contrast of large wars with Ronnie’s
case. John compares Ronnie’s case to ‘a European war blowing up’ and a ‘civil war’ where
