What do you think?
Rate this book
Time and the Conways
The Conways are having a party to celebrate Kay's twenty first birthday. Kay hopes to be a novelist. Hazel, the beauty, anticipates a romantic marriage. Madge wants to reform the world and marry the dashing young family lawyer. Carol, the baby of the family, spreads good cheer while Robin, back from war, is certain to have a good career. Alan is content to be an armchair philosopher. The nitwit mother has high hopes for them all. At the party Kay, with frightening clarity, sees her family twenty years in the future. They are petty, mean, and unfulfilled. Only Kay and her calm brother realize time is relative and there is something fine and worthwhile beyond.
John Boynton Priestley (1894 - 1984) was born in Bradford, Yorkshire, son of a schoolmaster. He left BelleVue School at 16 and worked in a wool office, beginning to write in his spare time. He volunteered for the army in 1914 and served throughout the First World War, surviving the grim conditions of the trenches. He gained a grant to go to Cambridge and launched his professional career with Brief Diversions, a collection of short pieces, which attracted attention in London. Mr. Priestley entered the theatre in 1932 with Dangerous Corner, and dominated the London stage during the 1930s with a succession of plays such as I Have Been Here Before, Time and the Conways, When We Are Married, An Inspector Calls, The Linden Tree, and The Glass Cage. During the Second World War, he established a new reputation as a broadcaster. A prolific writer, he continued writing novels, notably Bright Day and Lost Empires, and an important list of non-fiction, English Journey, launched him into a new role as a social commentator. Mr. Priestley was married three times and had four daughters and one son. He was a lifelong socialist of the old kind, yet never joined the Labour Party. He was a spokesman for the ordinary people, unashamedly middlebrow, patriotic, honest and, opposed to the class system. He turned down offers of a knighthood and a peerage but gladly accepted the Order of Merit in 1977.
John Boynton Priestley (1894 - 1984) was born in Bradford, Yorkshire, son of a schoolmaster. He left BelleVue School at 16 and worked in a wool office, beginning to write in his spare time. He volunteered for the army in 1914 and served throughout the First World War, surviving the grim conditions of the trenches. He gained a grant to go to Cambridge and launched his professional career with Brief Diversions, a collection of short pieces, which attracted attention in London. Mr. Priestley entered the theatre in 1932 with Dangerous Corner, and dominated the London stage during the 1930s with a succession of plays such as I Have Been Here Before, Time and the Conways, When We Are Married, An Inspector Calls, The Linden Tree, and The Glass Cage. During the Second World War, he established a new reputation as a broadcaster. A prolific writer, he continued writing novels, notably Bright Day and Lost Empires, and an important list of non-fiction, English Journey, launched him into a new role as a social commentator. Mr. Priestley was married three times and had four daughters and one son. He was a lifelong socialist of the old kind, yet never joined the Labour Party. He was a spokesman for the ordinary people, unashamedly middlebrow, patriotic, honest and, opposed to the class system. He turned down offers of a knighthood and a peerage but gladly accepted the Order of Merit in 1977.
250 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1937
12 people are currently reading
342 people want to read
About the author
J.B. Priestley
470 books288 followersJohn Boynton Priestley was an English writer. He was the son of a schoolmaster, and after schooling he worked for a time in the local wool trade. Following the outbreak of the Great War in 1914, Priestley joined the British Army, and was sent to France - in 1915 taking part in the Battle of Loos. After being wounded in 1917 Priestley returned to England for six months; then, after going back to the Western Front he suffered the consequences of a German gas attack, and, treated at Rouen, he was declared unfit for active service and was transferred to the Entertainers Section of the British Army.
When Priestley left the army he studied at Cambridge University, where he completed a degree in Modern History and Political Science. Subsequently he found work as theatre reviewer with the Daily News, and also contributed to the Spectator, the Challenge and Nineteenth Century. His earliest books included The English Comic Characters (1925), The English Novel (1927), and English Humour (1928). His breakthrough came with the immensely popular novel The Good Companions, published in 1929, and Angel Pavement followed in 1930. He emerged, too, as a successful dramatist with such plays as Dangerous Corner (1932), Time and the Conways (1937), When We Are Married (1938) and An Inspector Calls (1947).
The publication of English Journey in 1934 emphasised Priestley's concern for social problems and the welfare of ordinary people.
During the Second World War Priestley became a popular and influential broadcaster with his famous Postscripts that followed the nine o'clock news BBC Radio on Sunday evenings. Starting on 5th June 1940, Priestley built up such a following that after a few months it was estimated that around 40 per cent of the adult population in Britain was listening to the programme.
Some members of the Conservative Party, including Winston Churchill, expressed concern that Priestley might be expressing left-wing views on the programme, and, to his dismay, Priestley was dropped after his talk on 20th October 1940.
After the war Priestley continued his writing, and his work invariably provoked thought, and his views were always expressed in his blunt Yorkshire style.
His prolific output continued right up to his final years, and to the end he remained the great literary all-rounder. His favourite among his books was for many years the novel Bright Day, though he later said he had come to prefer The Image Men.
It should not be overlooked that Priestley was an outstanding essayist, and many of his short pieces best capture his passions and his great talent and his mastery of the English language. He set a fine example for any would-be author.
When Priestley left the army he studied at Cambridge University, where he completed a degree in Modern History and Political Science. Subsequently he found work as theatre reviewer with the Daily News, and also contributed to the Spectator, the Challenge and Nineteenth Century. His earliest books included The English Comic Characters (1925), The English Novel (1927), and English Humour (1928). His breakthrough came with the immensely popular novel The Good Companions, published in 1929, and Angel Pavement followed in 1930. He emerged, too, as a successful dramatist with such plays as Dangerous Corner (1932), Time and the Conways (1937), When We Are Married (1938) and An Inspector Calls (1947).
The publication of English Journey in 1934 emphasised Priestley's concern for social problems and the welfare of ordinary people.
During the Second World War Priestley became a popular and influential broadcaster with his famous Postscripts that followed the nine o'clock news BBC Radio on Sunday evenings. Starting on 5th June 1940, Priestley built up such a following that after a few months it was estimated that around 40 per cent of the adult population in Britain was listening to the programme.
Some members of the Conservative Party, including Winston Churchill, expressed concern that Priestley might be expressing left-wing views on the programme, and, to his dismay, Priestley was dropped after his talk on 20th October 1940.
After the war Priestley continued his writing, and his work invariably provoked thought, and his views were always expressed in his blunt Yorkshire style.
His prolific output continued right up to his final years, and to the end he remained the great literary all-rounder. His favourite among his books was for many years the novel Bright Day, though he later said he had come to prefer The Image Men.
It should not be overlooked that Priestley was an outstanding essayist, and many of his short pieces best capture his passions and his great talent and his mastery of the English language. He set a fine example for any would-be author.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 73 reviews
October 9, 2023
This play was broadcast starring Vanessa Redgrave by the BBC some 40 years ago. God, what a wonderful play it is! JB Priestly has presented two important truths about human psychology in this tale which are strikingly obvious, but which are singularly absent from nearly all literature. One is how words, dismissive comments thoughtlessly uttered or written can cause devastation, can cut and hurt beyond redemptioon, we cannot make them good again but we didn't mean them, at least not mean them to be so toxic, resentment which turns into hatred, destructive comments which can cause appalling damage. The other point is how easily persons can be influnced for the good by persons who are deeply good themselves (the writer tells us that Carol is "simply delightful":)) and how important those good persons are, important and I mean this very sincerely, not just to happiness, but to the way the human species is going, to human survival itsself. The tragic death of one young girl, Carol, who is an angel (and JB Priestly succeeds brilliantly in representing in Carol a truly good person, an angel from God, with no oppressive piety no prigishness to her at all) who is sunshine and goodness and whose unfortuitous departure from life signifies disaster for the fortunes of her family, spiritual and material. I wish more people knew this play. I think in a way it "saved" me, I mean by saved that it turned me away from becoming a much worse kind of person than I in fact, hopefully, became. Because Carol dies the world is a worse place. I love Carol, a character in fiction, but she is so alive it is impossible to believe that she is really an invention at all. We should cherish the Carols of this world, for such persons do exist and they do not clamour for fame like our wretched politicians and preachers and profiteers of growth, exploitation and destruction. They live within the confines of small circles of friends or quietly try to repair the damage that the boasters of terrorism and misery proclaim to the world in their arrogance and their nihilism. The Carols of the world are modest, withdrawn very often, not clamouring and they are too few. I ask myself why God's creation is such a vale of tears and daily our wretched fallen species seems to make life worse for itself and certainly for the non human species condemned (the only appropriate word now, condemned!!) to share its fortunes with the killer ape that is Homo sapiens -famine, torture and waste everywhere we look. One girl died too young in this play. Let those with their wits still about them read or better watch this play and learn what is there to be learned by anyone who also finds Carol "simply delightful".
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 14, 2009
The first play I've ever liked more when I read it than when I saw it performed. With two intermissions and without the freedom to read quickly over the boring charade game in the first act, it dragged on a bit too much.
But the idea is intriguing. The first act is set in 1919, the second in 1939, and the third back in 1919--all in the same room. The play demonstrates how little careless actions in the present can have devastating consequences in the future. The third act is quite enjoyable because we have just seen where each of the characters will (or might?--the play is ambiguous here) end up, and we are therefore keyed in on lines that would otherwise seem trivial and mundane. If nothing else, the innovative structure and the comment the play makes about time makes it a worthwhile read.
But the idea is intriguing. The first act is set in 1919, the second in 1939, and the third back in 1919--all in the same room. The play demonstrates how little careless actions in the present can have devastating consequences in the future. The third act is quite enjoyable because we have just seen where each of the characters will (or might?--the play is ambiguous here) end up, and we are therefore keyed in on lines that would otherwise seem trivial and mundane. If nothing else, the innovative structure and the comment the play makes about time makes it a worthwhile read.
February 27, 2022
ENGLISH: Together with An Inspector Calls, this is my favorite play by J.B. Priestley. This is the seventh time I have watched or read this play. The Linden Tree is also very nice, with a title quite difficult to translate into Spanish, as in English it has a double meaning.
Priestley was somewhat obsessed by time, and tended to believe in a cyclic time, in the way of Hinduism. His plays where this can be best noticed are Dangerous Corner and I Have Been Here Before, both of which I didn't like. But in "Time & the Conways" this is scarcely noticed, while the story of the family destroyed by time, which we can see through Kay's eyes in the second act, is quite moving. Only Alan's words, speaking of the circle whose center is God, point at a cyclical view of time.
ESPAÑOL: Junto con Llama un inspector, esta es mi obra favorita de J.B. Priestley. Esta es la séptima vez que veo o leo esta obra. El árbol de los Linden también está muy bien, con un título bastante difícil de traducir al español, ya que en inglés tiene doble sentido.
Priestley estaba algo obsesionado con el tiempo y tendía a creer en un tiempo cíclico, a la manera del hinduismo. Sus obras de teatro en las que esto se nota más son Dangerous Corner y I Have Been Here Before, que no me gustaron. Pero en "Time & the Conways" esto apenas se nota, mientras que la historia de la familia destruida por el tiempo, que podemos ver a través de los ojos de Kay en el segundo acto, es conmovedora. La única alusión al tiempo cíclico son las palabras de Alan respecto al círculo cuyo centro es Dios.
Priestley was somewhat obsessed by time, and tended to believe in a cyclic time, in the way of Hinduism. His plays where this can be best noticed are Dangerous Corner and I Have Been Here Before, both of which I didn't like. But in "Time & the Conways" this is scarcely noticed, while the story of the family destroyed by time, which we can see through Kay's eyes in the second act, is quite moving. Only Alan's words, speaking of the circle whose center is God, point at a cyclical view of time.
ESPAÑOL: Junto con Llama un inspector, esta es mi obra favorita de J.B. Priestley. Esta es la séptima vez que veo o leo esta obra. El árbol de los Linden también está muy bien, con un título bastante difícil de traducir al español, ya que en inglés tiene doble sentido.
Priestley estaba algo obsesionado con el tiempo y tendía a creer en un tiempo cíclico, a la manera del hinduismo. Sus obras de teatro en las que esto se nota más son Dangerous Corner y I Have Been Here Before, que no me gustaron. Pero en "Time & the Conways" esto apenas se nota, mientras que la historia de la familia destruida por el tiempo, que podemos ver a través de los ojos de Kay en el segundo acto, es conmovedora. La única alusión al tiempo cíclico son las palabras de Alan respecto al círculo cuyo centro es Dios.
May 30, 2024
Priestley shows the demise of postwar/youthful optimism in the 1930s/middle-age. He counters with a mystical view of all life’s joys and woes existing together outside time.
December 13, 2024
Me la he leído porque Pizarnik habla de ella en sus diarios. Es especial, me gusta cómo se relacionan lo personal y lo político: la esperanza en la Inglaterra de posguerra, el deseo colectivo de construir un mundo nuevo, se unen a la esperanza y optimismo hacia el futuro de los personajes de la obra. El doble desengaño. Triste, pero lo justo.
September 13, 2017
The imminent Broadway revival of this - along with earlier enjoyable readings of Priestley's 'An Inspector Calls' and 'Dangerous Corner' - impelled me to pick this up. Although a serviceable and undoubtedly innovative drama for its time, I hate to say it, but now it just seems nothing more than a quaint curio - and can't for the life of me fathom why someone feels it Broadway worthy at this point in time. I thought perhaps the figure of Mrs. Conway (originated by Dame Sybil Thorndyke and to be embodied in the current production by Elizabeth McGovern) might provide one of those deliciously camp diva roles - but she is offstage more than on, and doesn't seem to do much with her stage time anyway. Much like Kaufman & Hart's 'Merrily We Roll Along' from 3 years earlier, its chief Raison d'être is to play around with chronological time and show how the innocent idealistic ideologies of our youth lead to the soured dashed dreams of middle age; while that is now an accepted universal truth, I suppose it was somewhat revolutionary back in 1937.
August 27, 2016
The first act drags a little, the second is depressing and the third fractious and frustrating. Despite all that, and in many ways because if it, this is a strong play.
Cleverly put together to give the reader/audience a poignant overview of the disintegration of family happiness through the ripples of society, their own hubris, stray comments, or words left unsaid. None of the characters are saints, though the younger daughter Carol could have been a catalyst for good, given the chance. None of them are monsters either; even if Ernest runs that title close he gives context for his behaviour at least.
Socially prescient, politically committed and technically well put together, this sits well with the more compact An Inspector Calls in Priestley's work.
Cleverly put together to give the reader/audience a poignant overview of the disintegration of family happiness through the ripples of society, their own hubris, stray comments, or words left unsaid. None of the characters are saints, though the younger daughter Carol could have been a catalyst for good, given the chance. None of them are monsters either; even if Ernest runs that title close he gives context for his behaviour at least.
Socially prescient, politically committed and technically well put together, this sits well with the more compact An Inspector Calls in Priestley's work.
July 23, 2021
This exploration of family unity, loyalty and dishonesty is structured through three acts to use time as a clever ingredient of viewing, and attempting to predict, the future.
It depicts a typical upper middle-class family of the era, showing the inherent snobbery, their patchy understanding of the world they occupy, and how time and experience can fracture the internal relationships of a family. None of the characters is a monster, and none is a saint. Their levels of selfishness, self-satisfaction, ignorance, superficial charm, ambition and blindness reflect those of the society in which they exist.
In many ways, this is a play of its time. So much that it says has become common knowledge in the intervening years, which demonstrates Priestley’s prescience and contemporary observation.
It’s not a play I enjoyed, but I was engaged by the characters, as well-drawn as is usual with this playwright. A somewhat depressing play for me.
It depicts a typical upper middle-class family of the era, showing the inherent snobbery, their patchy understanding of the world they occupy, and how time and experience can fracture the internal relationships of a family. None of the characters is a monster, and none is a saint. Their levels of selfishness, self-satisfaction, ignorance, superficial charm, ambition and blindness reflect those of the society in which they exist.
In many ways, this is a play of its time. So much that it says has become common knowledge in the intervening years, which demonstrates Priestley’s prescience and contemporary observation.
It’s not a play I enjoyed, but I was engaged by the characters, as well-drawn as is usual with this playwright. A somewhat depressing play for me.
Read
October 9, 2011I like how the didacticism (the "Christmas Carol" message of change your life before it's too late) is subdued by the ambiguity of the ending. I also enjoyed how the "rule" of chronological time was broken - also breaking away from the somber reality of the second act.
December 17, 2014
I've read a few plays for college and I think this is the one I enjoyed the most so far. I liked how the author played with the concept of time, especially the future, and it kept me thinking, can we really change our future or it's already written?
August 28, 2015
Very well-written but kind of depressing.
October 16, 2025
Good books can change us. They make us reflect on our own lives and past behaviours and make us resolve to do things differently from now on. When we see a bad character in a book and recognise something about them in us - or if we see a good person in a book who does something that has a negative impact unintended in scale and/or duration, we ourselves resolve to do better in future. And so it is with JB Priestley’s ‘Time and the Conways’ where one character is good through and through (the benchmark) and the others are normal people prone to making hurtful remarks when tired and stressed. Hurtful remarks whose impacts continue for the following eighteen years (and presumably beyond). Suffice to say there is a great deal of bitterness bubbling away in the Conway household in 1937 about things that happened and/or were said in the past - including at that birthday party in 1919. In that regard, ‘Time and the Conways’ is a warning to us all: things cannot be said, and actions cannot be undone, so be careful.
‘Time and the Conways’ is a play not a short story (only 75 pages) but I am told that it works better in print than on the stage. I can believe that. Some reviews over the years have said the story is about pre-cognition, with a comment made at a family birthday party in 1919 appearing uncannily prescient in 1937. Another (enigmatic) family member sometimes appears to be inhabiting both 1919 and 1937 simultaneously. It is striking how this second character’s life, behaviour and personality have been influenced by these unconscious insights.
I always enjoy and appreciate insights into history that come from contemporaneous accounts. Though there are no doubt many excellent, well-researched accounts of life in England between the wars written in more recent times, reading a play that was actually written in the period - with no insight as to what is coming next - tells me much more about what it was like to be alive in England in the first half of the twentieth century. It was not an easy time, even for the middle classes. For a start, death stalked almost every family as most would have lost people in the war. For those who went from one war into another (WWII started two years after the play was published) there must have been a feeling of despair that we cannot imagine in 2025.
I think ‘Time and the Conways’ is an under appreciated gem.
‘Time and the Conways’ is a play not a short story (only 75 pages) but I am told that it works better in print than on the stage. I can believe that. Some reviews over the years have said the story is about pre-cognition, with a comment made at a family birthday party in 1919 appearing uncannily prescient in 1937. Another (enigmatic) family member sometimes appears to be inhabiting both 1919 and 1937 simultaneously. It is striking how this second character’s life, behaviour and personality have been influenced by these unconscious insights.
I always enjoy and appreciate insights into history that come from contemporaneous accounts. Though there are no doubt many excellent, well-researched accounts of life in England between the wars written in more recent times, reading a play that was actually written in the period - with no insight as to what is coming next - tells me much more about what it was like to be alive in England in the first half of the twentieth century. It was not an easy time, even for the middle classes. For a start, death stalked almost every family as most would have lost people in the war. For those who went from one war into another (WWII started two years after the play was published) there must have been a feeling of despair that we cannot imagine in 2025.
I think ‘Time and the Conways’ is an under appreciated gem.
January 14, 2023
Kay laughs in affectionate amusement at his bachelor's horror.
Madge enters. She is very different from the girl of Act I. She has short greyish hair, wears glasses, and is neatly but severely dressed. She speaks with a dry precision, but underneath her assured schoolmistress manner is a suggestion of the neurotic woman.
Madge enters. She is very different from the girl of Act I. She has short greyish hair, wears glasses, and is neatly but severely dressed. She speaks with a dry precision, but underneath her assured schoolmistress manner is a suggestion of the neurotic woman.
August 5, 2022
Good. This is the second play that I have read by J.B. Priestley and I enjoyed it.
The Conways were an eclectic bunch. Responsible and calm Alan, kind-hearted Carol, intelligent Kay, idealistic and later cynical Madge, greedy and vain Hazel, and feckless and irresponsible Robin. And in the midst of all this -their Mother- the snobbish Mrs. Conway. I liked Alan, Carol, and Kay. I also liked Madge and even her cynical turn later in the life (it was largely due to her family, loss of a loved one, and the society). However, Hazel, Robin, and Mrs. Conway were not likable in either Act I, II, or III.
I also liked the secondary characters - Gerard and Ernest. And I wish they got their happy ending. Joan - made her choice and got what she deserved. Although at the end, I held hope that she will stop pining after Robin and make a life for herself.
This play also features part of the poem, "Auguries of Innocence by William Blake" which I found really lovely.
It is right it should be so
Man was made for Joy & Woe
And when this we rightly know
Thro the World we safely go
Joy & Woe are woven fine
A Clothing for the soul divine
Under every grief & pine
Runs a joy with silken twine
The discussion regarding "time" in the play was a surprise because I thought the play was supposed to be about a family. However, I did enjoy reading about it especially the fact that time is not linear. It was interesting.
Overall, I liked this play.
The Conways were an eclectic bunch. Responsible and calm Alan, kind-hearted Carol, intelligent Kay, idealistic and later cynical Madge, greedy and vain Hazel, and feckless and irresponsible Robin. And in the midst of all this -their Mother- the snobbish Mrs. Conway. I liked Alan, Carol, and Kay. I also liked Madge and even her cynical turn later in the life (it was largely due to her family, loss of a loved one, and the society). However, Hazel, Robin, and Mrs. Conway were not likable in either Act I, II, or III.
I also liked the secondary characters - Gerard and Ernest. And I wish they got their happy ending. Joan - made her choice and got what she deserved. Although at the end, I held hope that she will stop pining after Robin and make a life for herself.
This play also features part of the poem, "Auguries of Innocence by William Blake" which I found really lovely.
It is right it should be so
Man was made for Joy & Woe
And when this we rightly know
Thro the World we safely go
Joy & Woe are woven fine
A Clothing for the soul divine
Under every grief & pine
Runs a joy with silken twine
The discussion regarding "time" in the play was a surprise because I thought the play was supposed to be about a family. However, I did enjoy reading about it especially the fact that time is not linear. It was interesting.
Overall, I liked this play.
Read
May 6, 2023This play is another of the time plays and the one that puts the concept into the best situation. There’s very little said about the theory and nothing too crazy happens. It just imagines the theory in practice.
The Conways are an ebullient family, despite the recent death of their father, a man who suddenly drowned. It’s right near the end of WWI and they’re awaiting the oldest son’s return. It’s a get together and they’re playing the old family games, having the old family squabbles, and the old family dramas. Two figure not in the family are also there. One, a family friend who is clearly in love with one of the daughters, and another man, a friend from the war of the brother who returns this night, with the awful name of Ernest Beavers (and he deserves it).
The second act is twenty years in the future. The family is not in the worst of situations, but several bad choices have led to disastrous personal lives and sad interactions. There’s a sense of loss at what might have been.
In act three, the daughter Kay, whose birthday it had been in act one, has awoken and realized that act two was a dream. This leads her to press certain issues more that were unspoken in act one.
The Conways are an ebullient family, despite the recent death of their father, a man who suddenly drowned. It’s right near the end of WWI and they’re awaiting the oldest son’s return. It’s a get together and they’re playing the old family games, having the old family squabbles, and the old family dramas. Two figure not in the family are also there. One, a family friend who is clearly in love with one of the daughters, and another man, a friend from the war of the brother who returns this night, with the awful name of Ernest Beavers (and he deserves it).
The second act is twenty years in the future. The family is not in the worst of situations, but several bad choices have led to disastrous personal lives and sad interactions. There’s a sense of loss at what might have been.
In act three, the daughter Kay, whose birthday it had been in act one, has awoken and realized that act two was a dream. This leads her to press certain issues more that were unspoken in act one.
October 3, 2013
Another book I had to read for my English class. This play consists of three acts, from which the second is the most enjoyable one, whilst the others (apart from the finale) are rather uninteresting and had too much filler for my taste. These two acts describe the time when The Conways used to be happy and their goals in life were still a dream for them.
The conversation between Alan and Kay was, in my opinion, the peak of this play. There are plenty of deep thoughts there, when sadness prevails over joyful situations described in acts I and III, and that is also the part where we can appreciate the actual message that Priestley wants to tell us, which is how we face the test of time and how we are consumed by it. There is a good use of a non-linear time progression, and this twist is also the other strong point of the play.
"Man was made for joy and woe; And when this we rightly know, Thro' the world we safely go."
The conversation between Alan and Kay was, in my opinion, the peak of this play. There are plenty of deep thoughts there, when sadness prevails over joyful situations described in acts I and III, and that is also the part where we can appreciate the actual message that Priestley wants to tell us, which is how we face the test of time and how we are consumed by it. There is a good use of a non-linear time progression, and this twist is also the other strong point of the play.
"Man was made for joy and woe; And when this we rightly know, Thro' the world we safely go."
September 3, 2024
It's nice. It makes you think in a "makes you think" way. It's Tennessee Williams without the oomph. I am very glad to have read it, because I like melancholy plays about the fundamental sadness of middle class life. But would I like to see it performed? As a 1970s BBC television play, perhaps, or an intimate production with a musician on keyboard, or perhaps the musical saw, in a theater that seats 60 people. But then again, the cast is just too big to allow you to drift into that coziness that is almost psychedelic, which, on the page, is its only real virtue. The Ibsen-except-actually-readable of An Inspector Calls, it is not.
August 18, 2012
From BBC Radio 4:
Classic drama of 'joy and woe' cutting back and forth in time as it follows a Yorkshire family's fortunes.
Classic drama of 'joy and woe' cutting back and forth in time as it follows a Yorkshire family's fortunes.
June 28, 2020
I picked this up after it having been on my shelf for a whole two years, and it really couldn’t have turned up at a more suitable time; definitely written in the stars.
In the situation we are in, it would be impossible not to immediately relate the events of the plot to our Covid pandemic.
The Conway’s carefree nature after the war directly reflects the reactions of so many in relation to the relaxations of lockdown; Mrs Conway turns down the hefty offer for her house while half a million people flock at Bournemouth beach, neither giving a single rational thought to the devastating effects this would have in the future.
It took me a while to interpret the point towards this play, as I am one who is easily swayed by happiness and hope in literature. I had originally fixated on ‘joy’ than ‘woe’, and on ‘safely through the world we go’. But after some reflection on the structure of the three acts, I now see that in fact, all hope can often be delusion. Life is not at all a dream; it is as real as reality may be, and while believing otherwise is best to maintain our sanity, the universe is ultimately tending towards chaos.
In the situation we are in, it would be impossible not to immediately relate the events of the plot to our Covid pandemic.
The Conway’s carefree nature after the war directly reflects the reactions of so many in relation to the relaxations of lockdown; Mrs Conway turns down the hefty offer for her house while half a million people flock at Bournemouth beach, neither giving a single rational thought to the devastating effects this would have in the future.
It took me a while to interpret the point towards this play, as I am one who is easily swayed by happiness and hope in literature. I had originally fixated on ‘joy’ than ‘woe’, and on ‘safely through the world we go’. But after some reflection on the structure of the three acts, I now see that in fact, all hope can often be delusion. Life is not at all a dream; it is as real as reality may be, and while believing otherwise is best to maintain our sanity, the universe is ultimately tending towards chaos.
July 28, 2025
Although a reader may find some similarity between Chekhov’s The Cherry Orchard regarding family issues economically, this play is different from Chekhov’s in that it explores the theme of TIME from a new perspective. The idea of TIME in this play is an illustration of J. W. Dunne’s theory in a dramatic form. Dunne’s theory of serial time is different from considering time on a linear scale. Dunne lectured the caste of Priestley’s play when the playwright premiered his 1937 time play, Time and the Conways. Dunne “argued that past, present and future were continuous in a higher-dimensional reality and only experienced sequentially because of our mental perception of them.” This idea is reflected in Priestley’s play both in form (the third act is like the first regarding the age of characters but the second one is different from the other two) and content (the presentiments or the premonition that Kay feels and her dialogue with Alan in act one and three.) In general I feel it’s a must-read play.
December 31, 2016
Next up in our book group’s between-the-wars season is J B Priestley, so we chose a play for a change. Act 1 takes place in 1919 in a back sitting-room where the Conways are dressing up to perform charades at a 21st birthday party. Act 2 revisits the room for a fraught family conference on the same birthday in 1937. Act 3 returns to 1919 as the party winds up. Great writing: the ten characters came alive even on a solitary read-through. I look forward to the group read-through before we descend en masse on a local production by a reputedly good am-dram company. The time shifts are thought-provoking, and the message about how best to live and evaluate one’s life is telling but not overdone.
January 4, 2022
Like the Inspectir, this is a play that explores time. Time is shown here as affecting and destroying us all, and simply moving us “ from one peep hole to the next “. There is little sense here though if the way time can also redeem.
The drama starts in a family’s life earlier in the twentieth century , showing us their dreams and aspirations them thwart to show where they’ve gone, them back again to show the seeds of what went wrong. There are points made about the power of words and the gap left by the truly good , as well as contemporary political concerns such as strikes and social progress .
A grim but engrossing drama .
The drama starts in a family’s life earlier in the twentieth century , showing us their dreams and aspirations them thwart to show where they’ve gone, them back again to show the seeds of what went wrong. There are points made about the power of words and the gap left by the truly good , as well as contemporary political concerns such as strikes and social progress .
A grim but engrossing drama .
November 5, 2025
i read this play as a part of the “inspector calls and other plays” showcase, this came up first and i found it to be slow through the first act but it was all just set up for the second act, where it all went down and we see what the motivation of the story behind the play actually is. hazel went from a happy woman to miserable and being bullied by the man she didn’t want any business with at all, madge being a full on socialist, robin a horrible person, joan having to depend on herself, carol dead, and kay miserable after realising the contrast between the twenty years. it shows you how much time can change everything.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 2, 2018
The play works on the level of a universal human tragedy and a powerful portrait of the history of Britain between the Wars. Priestley shows how through a process of complacency and class arrogance, Britain allowed itself to decline and collapse between 1919 and 1937, instead of realizing the availability of immense creative and humanistic potential accessible during the post-war (the Great War) generation. Priestley could clearly see the tide of history leading towards another major European conflict as he has his character Ernest comment in 1937 that they are coming to 'the next war'
September 3, 2018
This realistic piece tells us about the time. We make a trip in the future and back again. And it's really sad. The life of 40 years aged person is not the same as one he think about when he was a young men.
What is the time? Is it kind? Is it cruel? Can we change our future? Do we have an free will or are some acts irreversible for human beings?
This piece is very rich of sense. I think it must be read by young people.
What is the time? Is it kind? Is it cruel? Can we change our future? Do we have an free will or are some acts irreversible for human beings?
This piece is very rich of sense. I think it must be read by young people.
October 8, 2023
4 stars. this is the 2nd j.b. Priestley play i've read . although the beginning dragged a little for me, the message was very strong and emotional. it says a lot about how society twists people , especially in that time period.
i really liked it !:) carols story was heartbreaking, especially when she says "the point it- to live" "i'm going to live"
Also Ernest had huge negative character development. well, there was a lot of character development in general. (obviously)
i really liked it !:) carols story was heartbreaking, especially when she says "the point it- to live" "i'm going to live"
Also Ernest had huge negative character development. well, there was a lot of character development in general. (obviously)
December 9, 2017
Expecting the tight plotting of Priestly's An Inspector Calls and having recently read and not been enthralled by Tracy Letts family drama August: Osage County, I probably didn't give Time and the Conways family drama a fair go of it. A good reminder to me of the importance and unfairness of context.
April 26, 2025
The whole thing was a little lost on me, possibly too common for all the nuance and very out of the loop on social situations after ww1, just kinda felt a bit… too smart for me? Either that or it really was crap and everyone else is rating it highly because they wanna look smart, but hey what do I know
September 28, 2025
Een mooi BBC-radiodrama van dit stuk.
Wat gemengde gevoelens: bij momenten is dit een boeiende Engelse Tsjechov over hoe de jeugddromen sterven in de volwassenheid.
Maar het eerste bedrijf start langdradig en Priestley brengt soms zijn filosofische ideeën over de tijd en zijn politieke antikapitalistische visie te direct tot uiting, wat boodschapperig overkomt.
Wat gemengde gevoelens: bij momenten is dit een boeiende Engelse Tsjechov over hoe de jeugddromen sterven in de volwassenheid.
Maar het eerste bedrijf start langdradig en Priestley brengt soms zijn filosofische ideeën over de tijd en zijn politieke antikapitalistische visie te direct tot uiting, wat boodschapperig overkomt.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 73 reviews