What do you think?
Rate this book
Entertaining Mr. Sloane
Entertaining Mr Sloane was first staged in 1964. Despite its success in performance, and being hailed by Sir Terence Rattigan as 'the best first play' he'd seen in 'thirty odd years', it was not until the London production of Loot in 1966 - less than a year before Joe Orton's untimely death - that theatre audiences and critics began to more fully appreciate the originality of Orton's elegant, alarming and hilarious writing. Introduced by John Lahr, the author of Orton's biography Prick up Your Ears, Entertaining Mr Sloane is now established as an essential part of the repertoire of the modern theatre.
97 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1965
5 people are currently reading
271 people want to read
About the author
Joe Orton
46 books85 followersJohn Kingsley ("Joe") Orton was an English playwright. In a short but prolific career lasting from 1964 until his death in 1967, he shocked, outraged, and amused audiences with his scandalous black comedies. The adjective Ortonesque is now used to refer to something characterised by a dark but farcical cynicism.
Joe Orton began to write plays in the early 1960s. He wrote his only novel: posthumously published as Head to Toe, in 1959, and had his writing accepted soon afterward. In 1963 the BBC paid £65 for the radio play The Ruffian on the Stair, broadcast on 31 August 1964. It was substantially rewritten for the stage in 1966.
Orton had completed Entertaining Mr. Sloane by the time Ruffian was broadcast. The play premiered on 6 May 1964 directed by Michael Codron. Reviews ranged from praise to outrage. It lost money in its 3-week run, but critical praise from playwright Terence Rattigan, who invested £3,000 in it, ensured its survival. Sloane tied for first in the Variety Critics' Poll for "Best New Play" and Orton came second for "Most Promising Playwright." Within a year, Sloane was being performed in New York, Spain, Israel and Australia, as well as being made into a film and a television play.
Orton's next work was Loot, written between June and October 1964. The play is a wild parody of detective fiction, adding the blackest farce and jabs at established ideas on death, the police, religion, and justice. It underwent sweeping rewrites before it was judged fit for the West End. Codron had manoeuvred Orton into meeting his colleague Kenneth Williams in August 1964. Orton reworked Loot with Williams in mind for Truscott. His other inspiration for the role was DS Harold Challenor. The play opened to scathing reviews. Loot moved to the West End in November 1966, raising Orton's confidence to new heights while he was in the middle of writing What the Butler Saw. Loot went on to win several awards and firmly established Orton's fame. He sold the film rights for £25,000 although he was certain it would flop. It did, but Orton, still on an absolute high, proceeded over the next ten months to revise The Ruffian on the Stair and The Erpingham Camp for the stage as a double called Crimes of Passion; wrote Funeral Games; wrote the screenplay Up Against It for the Beatles; and worked on What the Butler Saw.
The Good and Faithful Servant was a transitional work for Orton. A one-act television play completed by June 1964 but first broadcast by Associated-Rediffusion on 6 April 1967. The Erpingham Camp, Orton's take on The Bacchae, written through mid-1965 and offered to Rediffusion in October of that year, was broadcast on 27 June 1966 as the 'pride' segment in their series Seven Deadly Sins.
Orton wrote Funeral Games from July to November 1966 for a 1967 Rediffusion series, The Seven Deadly Virtues, It dealt with charity--especially Christian charity—in a confusion of adultery and murder. Rediffusion did not use the play; instead, it was made as one of the first productions of the new ITV company Yorkshire Television, and broadcast on 26 August 1968.
On 9 August 1967, Orton's lover Kenneth Halliwell bludgeoned 34-year-old Orton to death at his home in Islington, London, with a hammer and then committed suicide with an overdose of Nembutal tablets. Investigators determined that Halliwell died first, because Orton's body was still warm. Orton was cremated at the Golders Green Crematorium, his coffin brought into the chapel to The Beatles song "A Day in the Life". Harold Pinter read the eulogy saying "He was a bloody marvellous writer."
In his hometown, Leicester, a new pedestrian concourse outside the Curve theatre's main entrance is named "Orton Square." John Lahr wrote a biography of Orton entitled Prick Up Your Ears in 1978. A 1987 film adaptation directed by Stephen Frears starred Gary Oldman as Orton and Alfred Molina as Halliwell. Alan Bennett wrote the screenplay.
Joe Orton began to write plays in the early 1960s. He wrote his only novel: posthumously published as Head to Toe, in 1959, and had his writing accepted soon afterward. In 1963 the BBC paid £65 for the radio play The Ruffian on the Stair, broadcast on 31 August 1964. It was substantially rewritten for the stage in 1966.
Orton had completed Entertaining Mr. Sloane by the time Ruffian was broadcast. The play premiered on 6 May 1964 directed by Michael Codron. Reviews ranged from praise to outrage. It lost money in its 3-week run, but critical praise from playwright Terence Rattigan, who invested £3,000 in it, ensured its survival. Sloane tied for first in the Variety Critics' Poll for "Best New Play" and Orton came second for "Most Promising Playwright." Within a year, Sloane was being performed in New York, Spain, Israel and Australia, as well as being made into a film and a television play.
Orton's next work was Loot, written between June and October 1964. The play is a wild parody of detective fiction, adding the blackest farce and jabs at established ideas on death, the police, religion, and justice. It underwent sweeping rewrites before it was judged fit for the West End. Codron had manoeuvred Orton into meeting his colleague Kenneth Williams in August 1964. Orton reworked Loot with Williams in mind for Truscott. His other inspiration for the role was DS Harold Challenor. The play opened to scathing reviews. Loot moved to the West End in November 1966, raising Orton's confidence to new heights while he was in the middle of writing What the Butler Saw. Loot went on to win several awards and firmly established Orton's fame. He sold the film rights for £25,000 although he was certain it would flop. It did, but Orton, still on an absolute high, proceeded over the next ten months to revise The Ruffian on the Stair and The Erpingham Camp for the stage as a double called Crimes of Passion; wrote Funeral Games; wrote the screenplay Up Against It for the Beatles; and worked on What the Butler Saw.
The Good and Faithful Servant was a transitional work for Orton. A one-act television play completed by June 1964 but first broadcast by Associated-Rediffusion on 6 April 1967. The Erpingham Camp, Orton's take on The Bacchae, written through mid-1965 and offered to Rediffusion in October of that year, was broadcast on 27 June 1966 as the 'pride' segment in their series Seven Deadly Sins.
Orton wrote Funeral Games from July to November 1966 for a 1967 Rediffusion series, The Seven Deadly Virtues, It dealt with charity--especially Christian charity—in a confusion of adultery and murder. Rediffusion did not use the play; instead, it was made as one of the first productions of the new ITV company Yorkshire Television, and broadcast on 26 August 1968.
On 9 August 1967, Orton's lover Kenneth Halliwell bludgeoned 34-year-old Orton to death at his home in Islington, London, with a hammer and then committed suicide with an overdose of Nembutal tablets. Investigators determined that Halliwell died first, because Orton's body was still warm. Orton was cremated at the Golders Green Crematorium, his coffin brought into the chapel to The Beatles song "A Day in the Life". Harold Pinter read the eulogy saying "He was a bloody marvellous writer."
In his hometown, Leicester, a new pedestrian concourse outside the Curve theatre's main entrance is named "Orton Square." John Lahr wrote a biography of Orton entitled Prick Up Your Ears in 1978. A 1987 film adaptation directed by Stephen Frears starred Gary Oldman as Orton and Alfred Molina as Halliwell. Alan Bennett wrote the screenplay.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews
October 14, 2021
very good. very gay. incest was a bit much
November 2, 2013
I don't know...I'm beginning to think Orton is going to be one of those playwrights I am going to admire without actually liking. I don't mind dark or absurdist plays in the least, and I can see how Orton is thumbing his nose at all sorts of social niceties, but I think I need some deeper existential dread underwriting the whole thing, ala Pinter.
January 27, 2020
3/5 stars
March 12, 2016
3.5 stars from me. I listened to the audio play version from BBC Radio 3 at a third-party website today, and I felt it is the best to do the first half and take a break before heading back to finish the second half. It was interesting and very darkly humored with well-written characters. Kath and Ed (sister and brother) have a special connection with Sloane, the young handsome lodger at Kath's home. Not sure if this was true or just my thought, but Sloane is the image of someone they lost in the past: the same person who was Kath's lover and Ed's friend. During the second half of the audio play, Sloane did not show his true self fully until he was accused of murder and a terrible incident that affects all of the characters. After that, the last 30 minutes drags a lot for me but with a conclusion that goes back to the special connection between Kath, Ed, and Sloane that I felt that it fits them.
November 22, 2011
Very daring for its day. Not quite as funny as I remembered
December 28, 2019
An amazing piece of writing about some of the most immoral and distressing characters I have ever read.
March 3, 2024
Delightfully dark and spiteful, if in a rather adolescent way.
The plot's simple: a young man, Sloane, comes to 'take a room' in the house of Kath, a middle-aged woman on the edge of mental instability, and her father, Kemp, who's nearly blind and often cruel. Kath's brother, Ed, also calls by, though Kemp won't speak to him (and hasn't since he caught him doing something unspeakable with another boy years ago). Dottily, Kath seems to see Sloane as both a replacement for the boy she gave up for adoption, and the young man who fathered him; Ed, too, sees him as a replacement for the friend he was caught with - who might be the same man.... and Sloane might in fact be that child... or be a joyriding ruffian who murdered Kemp's boss.... but since we can't believe a word that comes out of Sloane's mouth, and the other characters aren't so good at admitting the truth of their lives to themselves, let alone to others, does this matter?
Kath and Ed try it on with Sloane, who comes to loggerheads with Kemp, and while Sloane might see himself as a possibly-bisexual puppetmaster who gets round people verbally and then acts how he wishes, he's little more than a reaching child himself, and it only takes a few loose threads for him to unravel.
This is a brilliant mid-60s British farce, sending up the shabby attempts at gentility in most lower-middle-class pretensions, making great use of slippers and polish, sideboards and 'woolies', egg and chips and a side of ham for tea. The England we were promised in the postwar is revealed to the audience - but rarely the characters - in all its deluded, underfunded desperation. Kemp, Ed and Kath all believe they uphold their bargain with society as upstanding citizens, but of course they're all after one thing or another that same society has denied them, and rarely well-intentioned when they go for it. Sloane is no better than them, though his dishonesty is more upfront, somehow more honest.
Orton has a great ear for British colloquialisms, how people talk past each other, contradict themselves and double back and are susceptible to manipulation, as well as the silly quotidian concerns and unspeakable cruelties that the English perform in the name of good behaviour. It's pessimistic, in a way, or perhaps simply anarchic: Sloane is no machiavellian evil genius there to puncture, expose and exploit Kath, Kemp and Ed's wannabe-bourgeois concerns, more a slick chancer without much substance to him. Is Orton suggesting there's no way out of this life, or simply only interested in mocking it?
In the respect, from one angle the play does seem a little thin, a collection of riffs and exchanges, nihilistic and rude, a bare bum pressed to the bay window of a house full of chintz on a suburban street. From another angle, though, it's such an incisive skewering of this kind of life that it makes for a great read and reminds you of all the social niceties that obscure or make possible great acts of cruelty (still going on, if translated into another set of English social norms).
I've never seen the play onstage, though I understand there's a film that might be worth seeking out, starring the great Beryl Reid (of the equally two-fingers-up, mid-60s enfant terrible The Killing of Sister George) as Kath....?
The plot's simple: a young man, Sloane, comes to 'take a room' in the house of Kath, a middle-aged woman on the edge of mental instability, and her father, Kemp, who's nearly blind and often cruel. Kath's brother, Ed, also calls by, though Kemp won't speak to him (and hasn't since he caught him doing something unspeakable with another boy years ago). Dottily, Kath seems to see Sloane as both a replacement for the boy she gave up for adoption, and the young man who fathered him; Ed, too, sees him as a replacement for the friend he was caught with - who might be the same man.... and Sloane might in fact be that child... or be a joyriding ruffian who murdered Kemp's boss.... but since we can't believe a word that comes out of Sloane's mouth, and the other characters aren't so good at admitting the truth of their lives to themselves, let alone to others, does this matter?
Kath and Ed try it on with Sloane, who comes to loggerheads with Kemp, and while Sloane might see himself as a possibly-bisexual puppetmaster who gets round people verbally and then acts how he wishes, he's little more than a reaching child himself, and it only takes a few loose threads for him to unravel.
This is a brilliant mid-60s British farce, sending up the shabby attempts at gentility in most lower-middle-class pretensions, making great use of slippers and polish, sideboards and 'woolies', egg and chips and a side of ham for tea. The England we were promised in the postwar is revealed to the audience - but rarely the characters - in all its deluded, underfunded desperation. Kemp, Ed and Kath all believe they uphold their bargain with society as upstanding citizens, but of course they're all after one thing or another that same society has denied them, and rarely well-intentioned when they go for it. Sloane is no better than them, though his dishonesty is more upfront, somehow more honest.
Orton has a great ear for British colloquialisms, how people talk past each other, contradict themselves and double back and are susceptible to manipulation, as well as the silly quotidian concerns and unspeakable cruelties that the English perform in the name of good behaviour. It's pessimistic, in a way, or perhaps simply anarchic: Sloane is no machiavellian evil genius there to puncture, expose and exploit Kath, Kemp and Ed's wannabe-bourgeois concerns, more a slick chancer without much substance to him. Is Orton suggesting there's no way out of this life, or simply only interested in mocking it?
In the respect, from one angle the play does seem a little thin, a collection of riffs and exchanges, nihilistic and rude, a bare bum pressed to the bay window of a house full of chintz on a suburban street. From another angle, though, it's such an incisive skewering of this kind of life that it makes for a great read and reminds you of all the social niceties that obscure or make possible great acts of cruelty (still going on, if translated into another set of English social norms).
I've never seen the play onstage, though I understand there's a film that might be worth seeking out, starring the great Beryl Reid (of the equally two-fingers-up, mid-60s enfant terrible The Killing of Sister George) as Kath....?
May 27, 2021
I was looking forward to read this, but sadly (and possibly as I'm not on Orton's intellectual level to understand his dark humour) it didn't appeal to me at all. With more thought though, Orton has cleverly used theatrical devices and was able to flawlessly blend comedy with violence which was what put me off (Kemp's death was unnecessary).
I respect him for exposing the human follies about 'sexual intolerance' (p.6), particularly society's double standard of accepting heterosexuality and making the rest as deviants. So this is really applicable to the LGBTQA+ community.
Orton just wants to convey that until people realise that we're all humans who just want to love and want to be loved back, he will keep his play alive by reminding everyone that by having a different sexual orientation other than being heterosexual does not make anyone less of a human. He was ahead of his time and I really admire his bravery in showing the audience that no matter how gross sexual intimacy is (as depicted by Kath and Sloane and at times, Ed), just by being queer or homosexual (now a a part of LGBTQA+), normalising heterosexuality does NOT make it any more disgusting than it already is.
Love is Love.
I respect him for exposing the human follies about 'sexual intolerance' (p.6), particularly society's double standard of accepting heterosexuality and making the rest as deviants. So this is really applicable to the LGBTQA+ community.
Orton just wants to convey that until people realise that we're all humans who just want to love and want to be loved back, he will keep his play alive by reminding everyone that by having a different sexual orientation other than being heterosexual does not make anyone less of a human. He was ahead of his time and I really admire his bravery in showing the audience that no matter how gross sexual intimacy is (as depicted by Kath and Sloane and at times, Ed), just by being queer or homosexual (now a a part of LGBTQA+), normalising heterosexuality does NOT make it any more disgusting than it already is.
Love is Love.
July 25, 2019
The second play of Orton's that I've read, it's an exploration of a certain state of being and a humorously grotesque study of a particular petit-bourgeois milieu that derives, I think, its humor primarily from playing with the phraseology of pop-psychology, self-help and advertising - having the characters make overt statements explaining their actions through blatant self-psychoanalyzing in the midst of a conversation that has, to this point, been fairly realistic - and the absurd readiness with which the characters accept extraordinary occurences. That's funny. But insightful? Not really. Whereas someone like Elfriede Jelinek uses that very language to mount poignant societal critiques while simultaneously opening our eyes to the absurdities of capitalism and the marketing machine, I don't think the same can be said about Orton, at least in this play. I enjoyed it somewhat, however I don't think it's a particularly strong work.
November 21, 2024
A strange play about a sexual love trial involving a brother and sister young man who becomes the sister's lodger and the brother's employee as they vie for his attention and affection. The lodher then kills the siblings father and after an initial belief that the lodger should be turned over to the Police, a cover story is concocted and a pact created whereby the siblings share the 'blackmailed' lodger in perpetuity.
Written in 1964 when homosexuality was still illegal, murder was a capital crime and women's sexuality still something to be mocked and/or denied it is not surprsing that the play, considered both revolutionary and obscene in its time, is strange. Interesting but from a world it is difficult to imagine existed.
What I would enjoy is to see this play well performed, to see if great actors could make it live. I confess, that whilst quite enjoying the plot and the 'drama', I was slightly confused by it all. It didn't quite make sense to me.
Written in 1964 when homosexuality was still illegal, murder was a capital crime and women's sexuality still something to be mocked and/or denied it is not surprsing that the play, considered both revolutionary and obscene in its time, is strange. Interesting but from a world it is difficult to imagine existed.
What I would enjoy is to see this play well performed, to see if great actors could make it live. I confess, that whilst quite enjoying the plot and the 'drama', I was slightly confused by it all. It didn't quite make sense to me.
September 7, 2021
Wow, this 1964 play is something. Dorian Gray meets Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? Joe Orton is a writer I need to get to know better (this is the first I've read from him.) In brief: a middle-aged brother and sister fall for the same man. The man turns out to be a murderer, but does that stop these siblings from pursuing him? Hey, at least their parents taught them to share! 😂 Sex, violence, social satire.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 16, 2021
Read this for my Queer Theatre class and I loved it, of course! It's funny, bizarre, and sexy all in the most uncomfortable ways. True theatre of the time and for all times - though, I must admit that my favorite kind of theatre is the one that requires a lot of conversation after witnessing it and also while performing it.
November 16, 2024
Demented black comedy, pretty fun. Orton's dialogue moves at a rapid pace, and in a way that I've not, in my limited view of 20th century theatre, seen before, and his characters are sort of upsettingly plausible. My decision on a whim to buy the complete plays increasingly turning out to be a good one.
January 10, 2019
Absolutely incredible.
Hilarious, terrifying, and ridiculously sexual. Class.
Hilarious, terrifying, and ridiculously sexual. Class.
February 19, 2020
What the what did I just read...a mess but I got it. A shared lover!
January 31, 2021
i thought this was going to be about a dinner party for some reason..... anyway, i was wrong
October 12, 2021
3 weeks into my english degree and this is the most iconic & chaotic reading so far
December 9, 2021
Interesting play. Subversive and funny and macabre, all at once.
February 9, 2022
Sociopath..............................
September 1, 2022
3.75/5
October 8, 2022
very weird
December 4, 2022
What did I just read?
October 24, 2023
insane. i loved it.
October 29, 2023
Astonishing.
January 29, 2024
actually found this quite funny. canny writer.
May 27, 2024
It’s a weird an uncomfortable play with a weird and uncomfortable ending.
January 25, 2025
i don’t think i got it, all i gained from this was confusion and discomfort
February 13, 2025
Very unexpected ending! Left me craving to know what happened after the events of the play
August 24, 2025
Certainly a very strange play. I shall review this again when I have watched it in November.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews