Tea and Sympathy

by Robert Woodruff Anderson

For nine males and two females. A coming of age story that takes place at a private boys academy.

Genres: Plays, Theatre, Drama, Fiction, Classics, LGBT, Gay

92 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1952

About the author

Robert Anderson (born Robert Woodruff Anderson) was an American playwright, screenwriter, and theater producer.

He is best remembered as the author of Tea and Sympathy. The play made its Broadway debut in 1953 and was made into an MGM film in 1956; both starred Deborah Kerr and John Kerr.

Reviews

[Lauren · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tea and Sympathy manages to be both dated and surprisingly relevant.

At an all-boys’ New England boarding school, Tom is a social outcast because he’s different than the other boys. He’s not an athlete and he doesn’t mind playing the female part in the school’s theatrical productions. He’s effeminate and rumors therefore abound about him. The one person who sympathizes with him is the new wife of his housemaster.

The twist is that Tom is not gay but is secretly in love with her.

I liked this play from the standpoint of how it dealt with social hierarchies, of how people make decisions to maintain their own social status, even when it conflicts with their moral compass. I found the play surprisingly light on its feet for the most part, willing to touch on issues without belaboring the point.

The subplot between the new wife and her husband is a little flatter than Tom’s tale, but it does a nice job of paralleling and highlighting the play’s themes.

That Tom is straight but merely meets the stereotypical idea of a gay man is part of the play’s resonance. Yes, attitudes have changed in the past sixty years, but people are still judged based on stereotypes and whether they fit certain expectations. If anything, I think it might be worse in our wired, segmented culture.

I also watched the movie, which was significantly revised due to the Hays Code. Given the limitations, it’s a decent adaptation, and I liked that they brought over the actors from the Broadway run. Definitely worth both reading (or watching the play) and checking out the movie. Recommended.

[Morgan Kail-Ackerman · Rating 5 out of 5]

I literally yelled “OH MY GOD” out loud in my bedroom at the end of act 2 and the end of the play. For a play written in the 50s, it is so progressive about feminism, homosexuality, and love. Amazing amazing amazing play!

[elena · Rating 3 out of 5]

This play was fine it has surprisingly hot takes on masculinity for 1953 but it wasn't like. Interesting

[Connie G · Rating 4 out of 5]

Written in 1953, this play is about Tom Lee, an effeminate young man of eighteen at a New England boarding school. He is being bullied by the other boys, and his sexual orientation is being questioned after skinny dipping with a male teacher at the school. Laura, the wife of his housemaster, is very sensitive to Tom's problems. Her husband thinks she should back off and offer no more support than "tea and sympathy." She feels that Tom is being teased because he's a little different, a musician and actor with longer hair, not fitting into the athletic mold of the other guys. Laura gets so involved that she crosses into dangerous territory for a faculty wife.

There is a lot written today about bullying of people who happen to be a little different, have a different sexual orientation, or act young for their age. But this play was probably ahead of its time in the 1950s when these things were not talked about much. This coming-of-age play showed how rumors, gossiping, and bullying can do enormous harm.

[Julie *:･ · Rating 3 out of 5]

For 1955 Laura and Tom have really progressive takes on what it means to be a man (or rather that it doesn’t make you less of a man if you like playing tennis (which apparently is a female sport in 1955??), dancing or not being interested in girls as well as having a “light walk”).
This is even more impressive when you consider that Tom is only 17/18 with intense pressure from his Dad, teachers and (male boarding school) peers.
The play is still surprisingly relevant today.
I liked that just because Tom has some female characteristics and doesn’t behave like the other boys he isn’t a gay character, showing that there is not one way to be a straight man.
—

LAURA: “Manliness is not all swagger and swearing and mountain climbing. Manliness is also tenderness, gentleness, consideration. You men think you can decide on who is a man, when only a woman can really know.“
—
Spoilers:
I do think Laura and Tom kind of ending up together is REALLY weird because in my head their age difference was more than just one or two years ◉⌓◉

[Bryan · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Half Price Books location I stopped at this weekend had a rack of very affordable priced vintage paperbacks. This one caught my eye as I love the often lurid “painted covers” on these books usually also accompanied by an outrageous “elevator pitch” quote. Reading it made me laugh out loud in the store and for $1 it was worth the risk. Unfortunately, the image for this book here on Goodreads is a generic one and not my copy. So... I’ll just have to share the quote:

The famous story of a student who needed love-and the married woman who dared to give it to him!

This is a play told in three acts. It is nearly impossible to discuss it without spoilers, but ...oh my gawd did I enjoy reading this play! There is a film adaptation made of this that appears to have been done while the play was still a hit although I heavily doubt it stays faithful to this script.

Bullying, homophobia, teen angst, unhappy marriage, rumors all in the setting of 1950’s New England prep school.

Reading this though I thought several times that (sadly) MANY people still think and behave this way.

Tom, our hero of sorts, I could relate to some of his personal dilemmas he’s going through as I felt much the same around his age. Also, my uncles and cousins are very much like other males in this play...toxic!

Herb, Tom’s father, is just the worst! I absolutely cringed while reading his lines.

Same goes for Bill, Laura’s husband, and Tom’s school mates. All disturbing alpha males.

Laura, our heroine of sorts, the way she stuck up for Tom to her husband and his father made me soothe over with joy. Then there’s the...well yeah.

Final thought; I think this could be set in today’s time period and stick to the script. I’m totally going to be keeping an eye out to see if any little theaters here in Chicago will be performing this.

[Alana · Rating 3 out of 5]

No way to review this without spoilers.

It feels dated, due to the subject matter and how it's handled. Apparently in Hollywood versions the young men are treated as college age rather than prep school, which, to me, changes the tone of the story. If the boy is barely 18, Laura comes across as much more predatory, even if she is really just trying to help him, which is one of the things that disturbed me about the play. But I wonder how much of that is my looking at it from 2017 eyes and not from 1960s? I DO like the theme of "don't make assumptions," but frankly, even though Laura is trying to help, her way of going about it at the end, effectively seducing Tom, is in my opinion not that helpful; in fact, it only reaffirms society's insinuation that a man is not a man unless he's lost his virginity to a woman. Really? That's our definition of manhood? I have to hope that this same story would be treated a little differently by a modern playwright. Not taking the assumption that he is or isn't gay, but merely that you should let who you are be defined by what society says it is.

[Kassie · Rating 4 out of 5]

"I'm talking about love and honor and manliness, and tenderness, and persecution. I'm talking about a lot. You haven't understood any of it."

A thorough and heartbreaking dissection of masculinity and the impossibility of proving it. 1953's Tea and Sympathy touches on sexuality and suicidal tendencies in a time when such conversations were taboo both in life and on stage. Certain themes made my modern sensibilities uncomfortable at times Laura's actions with Tom toe the line of consent and coercion , but overall it is a moving and forward thinking work of drama, one that I would love to see adapted on stage.

[Laura · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was blessed to be able to play Laura in college. What a fabulous, underrated show.

[Gunnar Larson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read in one sitting before bed… didn’t realize it was a stage play and not a novel / novella. No problem bc I love a good stage play.

Tea & Sympathy is very interesting… all of the stage direction about how much Tom loves Laura do a TON of leg work, and I really don’t know how to feel about how Anderson wants us to interpret these characters. Obviously staging and performance give a lot to the meaning, so going off the raw text it’s….. interesting. Am I supposed to believe Tom is straight and a victim? And Bill is the closet-case, with his hyper-masculinity code for homosexuality? And Tom is representative of Anderson’s version of masculinity, described through Laura as tenderness and openness. Laura’s description of why she fell in love with Bill supports that—that kind of open emotional bleeding is the bedrock of any relationship, and the implication is that Tom’s confiding in her is a similar kind of emotional affair…. The iconic ending line and implication of the consummation of their affair is a meeting of two souls…

But the way I want to think about Tea & Sympathy (and the way it’s staged and performed in Minnelli’s 1955 film, which is stellar btw) is as a story about a gay teen who hasn’t fully come to terms with his sexuality yet and the ways that conflicts in a world where everybody else knows it first. The way Tom seemingly represses himself and intentionally misunderstands others is very relatable. The way Tom latches onto Laura as the only person showing him sympathy is very relatable. Tom’s impotence with Ellie and suicide attempt is very relatable. And the play through this lens shows the world as it is to queer people—as a hostile place where even your father won’t hesitate to hate you for something you can’t control. And Laura is the only refuge he has.

And of course it can be both—Tom can be gay and repressed and Bill can be gay and repressed and their dichotomous queerness can co-exist because there isn’t one way to be queer. And Laura can genuinely feel empathy for Tom and sacrifice herself for his sake. In that world the ending isn’t sexual but an act of utter selflessness borne from pity. Anyway….

[Ethan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Films better 😢

[Carmen · Rating 4 out of 5]

After seeing conflicting reviews online, I was feeling trepidation about Tea and Sympathy, but now I’m glad I put aside my preconceived ideas and read it with an open mind.

The central issue is not Tom’s perceived homosexuality; it’s the persecution it provokes and the toxic masculinity that smothers any gesture of humanity. Even the supposedly tough Bill cannot bring himself to be vulnerable with his own wife because he feels self-conscious about it.

Speaking of which, some reviewers have felt that Laura’s behaviour towards Tom can be interpreted as predatory. I disagree. It’s never stated in the stage directions or in the dialogue that she makes him feel trapped. Laura’s “advances” consist only of trying to make Tom feel comfortable with himself, and try to prevent him from doing something she knows will make him even more miserable, because it’s not in his character.

The ending is perhaps the most controversial moment of the play. I don’t think Laura decides to sleep with Tom so he can prove he’s not gay; as she says to Bill in the previous scene, she’s been deprived of love in their marriage for reasons that are only hinted at, and she finds in the young student someone who shares her loneliness. Someone who reminds her of her first husband, John, who also felt pressured to prove his manliness in a stereotypical, exaggerated way. And she knows that consummating a physical relationship with a woman will relieve Tom’s anguish, so she thinks she’s helping him. Of course, whether this conduct towards an underage student is ethical or not is debatable, and it adds another layer of complexity to the story.

It’s a shame Tea and Sympathy is not staged as often as other plays. We could all use its message of tolerance.

[Amy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm trying to read more plays and get more educated in theatre, so this was a step towards that. I really liked the characters. I felt like everything tied in pretty well. It was interesting because the setting was only in about 3 rooms of a house and all of the "action" that occurred outside of the house had to be explained or mentioned when the characters came in. It made things interesting since the more 'intense' scenes happened outside of the setting.

I liked the ending though. I thought the relationship between the characters, especially Laura and Bill, was very well developed and shown through their dialogue and actions. Tom was my favorite. The things he was going through with his sexuality and peoples' perceptions of him seemed so relevant to today's society's preconceptions and prejudices even though it was written a few decades ago.

[امیرمحمد حیدری · Rating 1 out of 5]

ترجمه‌ی باشگاه ادبیات به‌نام چای و دلسوزی را خواندم که ترجمه‌ی مقبولی نبود؛ از عنوانش نیز هویداست. اما به‌هر ترتیب، کار دلچسب، مفید، آموزنده یا سرگرم‌کننده‌ای نبود.

[Bobby Keniston · Rating 4 out of 5]

When reading "Tea and Sympathy" today, I couldn't help but feel this successful Broadway play from 1953 (it ran for over 700 performances) is certainly dated. But the fact that the play made me angry and sad also demonstrates what no one can deny--- it is still relevant. It shouldn't have to be--- one wishes it were a relic, something for people of today to look at and say, "Wow, can you believe people used to be like this?" But it's not. It is still timely in its way.

Tom goes to a an all-boys private school. He has a huge crush on Laura, a house mother at his dorm, who's marriage to Bill, a real "man's man" who wants to be headmaster someday, is not what she hoped it would be. Right at the beginning, bully Ralph has spread a rumor that Tom and a teacher named Mr. Harris were discovered swimming naked together--- it is not true. Mr. Harris, in his only scene, asks Tom if he told the Dean something had happened, but Tom is completely in the dark. Harris is going away.

Laura, upset about these rumors that will affect Tom, and have gotten Harris fired without proof, confronts her husband, only to be told that men know when other men are off. And for the rest of the play, Tom is miserable, trying to prove that he is a man, even though his well-meaning roommate Al tells him he needs to cut his hair and "not walk so light". But even Al fails his friend, and, after pressure from his dad, intends to move out of the room.

Bill, unprofessionally, spreads rumors about Tom, perhaps even jealous of the lad, because his wife has an interest in his well being.

This play is tough: it is an early example of an American play dealing with sexual orientation, even though Tom is not gay, just sensitive and in love with Laura, who he can't be with. It talks a lot about when it means to be a "man" and criticizes what is known today as toxic masculinity. It criticizes notions that bullying is actually good for young men and helps them grow up. It criticizes the notion that men cannot be sensitive, cannot weep from emotion, cannot be different. These are all pretty impressive traits for a play in 1953.

It was hard for me to read it at times, as I was called homophobic slurs constantly in high school, and had rumors spread about me being gay. Fortunately, I have always known that being called gay isn't an insult, even if it isn't true. There is nothing wrong with being gay. I would rather be mistaken for gay than be mistaken for being a misogynist, homophobic jerk. And even though the character Tom doesn't have that luxury, I do think the play is trying to send that message.

The ending of course, which I won't spoil here, is perhaps problematic, but still, much better than I expected it to be. Laura is a great female character, very well rounded, and while not all of her motivations ring true, I imagine she was quite ahead of her time.

As I wrote above, the play was a big success, directed by Elia Kazan and starring Deborah Kerr, Leif Erickson, Dick York and John Kerr (no relation). The play was then made into a movie in 1956, with Deborah, Leif and John reprising their stage roles.

[Martin Denton · Rating 2 out of 5]

I found Tea and Sympathy to be almost unwatchable in 2007 (when I finally got to see it on stage). Written in 1953, this play by Robert Anderson tells the story of a 16-year-old boy at a boarding school in New Hampshire who is persecuted for being "queer": after he is seen swimming nude with one of his teachers, the rumor mill cranks up to warp speed and within days pretty much everyone at the school, from the Dean on down, is ready to believe the worst about this young man. Only his housemaster's wife, Laura, recognizes that the boy is being treated unfairly. After he makes an abortive visit to the local town whore, Laura decides to help him prove his manhood by having sex with him, uttering the show's famous curtain line, "When you talk about this--and you will!--be kind."

This was racy stuff 70 years ago; what are we to make of it today?

The protagonist of the play is Laura, who alone among the characters understands the harm being done to the boy (his name is Tom Lee) by these unjust and untrue accusations. She also comes to realize that her marriage to Bill, the teacher who leads the charge against Tom, is a sham. In some ways, her independence and self-reliance are startlingly proto-feminist; but she remains a woman defined solely in terms of men, and her final act in the play, viewed as supreme sacrifice in the buttoned-up Eisenhower Era, is hard to place into context nowadays. The nobility of a 30-something sleeping with a 16-year-old kid somehow eluded me--with good reason, I'd argue.

If we try to empathize with Tom's point of view, it's similarly problematic. Everybody, even Laura, seems to acknowledge Tom's "difference" (supposedly he walks funny; he likes poetry; he plays women's roles in the school play). But the "gay=bad" equation that propels Tea and Sympathy makes it, hopefully, very dated.

The other corner of the play's triangle is Laura's husband, Bill, who comes off as such a repressed closet case that you don't need to claim to have any gaydar to realize it. Having such a presence as the villain of the piece makes that "gay=bad" aesthetic that I was just talking about even more pronounced.

Now, one can argue that by even raising these then-taboo issues in 1953, Anderson was doing something worthwhile, and there's certainly merit in that. But the question remains: what does Tea and Sympathy have to show us today?

[lemon snicket · Rating 4 out of 5]

4/5 stars
Overall, not sure if I will read again but several aspects are an interesting commentary about the 50’s and their parallels to the current times. I enjoyed the read and have a lot of in depth thoughts.

I hate Laura, but love her formation as a character. I think she was a strong woman for the time period, however I think it was wrong for her to take advantage of Tom just after he turned 18. In my interpretation, she was calling her 2nd husband queer, and has not had sex since marriage because of it (nevermind that the trips he takes are with men, instead of with his wife like the other men do, and how he wants the disappearance of queer presence). She wants to ‘help Tom become a man’ yet takes advantage of him and coerces him into sleeping with her. DAY(s?) after he attempts to unalive himself.

I do not appreciate the fact that there were only three women characters, one being a ‘slut,’ one who works at an all boys school because she likes the idea of boys chasing her, and one that is so incredibly strong yet takes advantage of this extremely vulnerable boy.

I liked how they spoke about the box of masculinity in the time period- if you did not fit into this box you were outcasted. In this case, people that were not liked were called ‘queer’ and almost had their futures ripped apart because of it. I think there was a sad but true representation of the dad being happy that his boy was going to be expelled for being with a girl, how he would rather it be for something that ‘all men have tried to do’ than something like him being mentally ill or queer.

I like the creative choice of explaining the what happened with Ellie instead of portraying it. The play was very much pushing the narrative that not even Tom was going on inside his mind, and I think this parallel of him not seeing anything for himself to us (the reader) not seeing of him anymore spoke volumes. After the reader finds out what happens, Tom is only show as a shell and he does not make any decisions for himself afterthefact. Not only is it inferred that he has no idea what he is, it is physically portrayed to the audience.

[Kristi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tea and Sympathy opened at the Ethel Barrymore Theatre on September 30, 1953. Deborah Kerr starred as the sympathetic Laura. This play launched a successful stage and film career for this British Actress. A male private school student, Tom Lee, faces accusations of homosexuality. A woman, Laura, who is married to an instructor, opposes the students' shaming of Lee and romantically pursues him so he can prove that he has a masculine character. The title refers to what someone in Laura's position was supposed to offer a boy such as Tom. Everett Evans of the Houston Chronicle called it "one of the first plays to tackle the then-taboo topic of sexual orientation and related prejudice." Evans stated that the play's final line, "Years from now, when you speak of this, and you will, be kind," is "one of the most quoted curtain lines in stage history". I liked both the play and the film. It was easy to picture the dialogue since Kerr reprised the role in the 1956 film. Recommend. Kristi & Abby Tabby

[Carlos · Rating 5 out of 5]

There is such depth of feeling in this play as to make it heart-achingly beautiful. Anderson manages to highlight perfectly the plight of the young man that every other man is ready to call “queer” simply because he does not quite fit in, because he likes music, doesn’t like aggressive sports and even walks “funny”. Through the eyes of a woman who can see the persecution of this young man for what it is, a scapegoat for the insecurities of its leaders, the reader is able to empathize with the hopeless situation the young man is put in. While I would have liked it even more if the young man had indeed been gay and all this persecution had still been shown to be ludicrous, it is no mean feat for a play of 1950s to focus on the irrationality of the persecution of the different.

[Sam Smiley · Rating 4 out of 5]

The main character, Laura, is a smart, clever, and driven woman— my kind of feminist character. She knows what she believes and speaks up for what is right. My one issue is that this play was written in the 1950s, and thus, it completely stigmatizes homosexuality. It’s the “sin” from which men need to be saved. This notion is ridiculous as being a queer is not a bad thing. Nevertheless, the way this play handles the ideas of toxic masculinity astounds and delights me. Tea and Sympathy deals with many serious themes, feminism, bullying, love, sex, and homosexuality, and it deals with them well. Worth the read!

[Glenn Hopp · Rating 4 out of 5]

A surprisingly good play (1953), which is more frank and challenging than the movie version (1956) even with a screenplay by the playwright Robert Anderson himself. The film also cast the three main leads from the long-running Broadway play, but it would be a mistake to take the film’s muted flavor as representative. Laura’s marriage to Bill reveals more in the play, especially in their last conversation, and what today we call toxic masculinity is shown more painfully in the play along with the era’s pressures to conform. The main appeal of the film may be its wide-screen compositions and long takes, though Deborah Kerr and John Kerr are effective. The play is certainly worth reading.

[Em Stern · Rating 5 out of 5]

Deeply engaging play about what it means to be a “real man”. Dives into toxic masculinity and it’s impact on young boys. Loved Laura’s line “ You men think you can decide on who is a man, when only a woman can really know.” Men are constantly categorizing themselves and other men as “manly” when the there is no true definition of a man. And when Tom is conspired to be gay, the men in the play, including Tom, deem it to be true simply based on the others definition of a “real man”. Great and quick read. Stage directions and set a little confusing. Was hard to paint a picture of it in my head. But brilliant scenes and characters with depth.

[Kiely · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Years from now, when you talk about this -- and you will -- be kind."

I read this after I watched the excellent film, and I can't believe how much more explicit and obvious this is then the bowdlerized version of the film made under the Hays Code! I think this play has a lot of interesting things to say about toxic masculinity and the fear of anyone who's different, but it's hard to get around the relatively unenlightened understanding of queer people and the spectrum of human sexuality, as well as the fact that Laura sleeps with a student at the end???? Otherwise, this was a good play and I would love to see it produced on a stage someday.

[Daniel Hiland · Rating 5 out of 5]

Powerful play about a young college student falsely accused of homosexuality. Though the topic of sexual orientation and associated prejudice was taboo in 1953, the story is told in a touching, compassionate way, and holds a message about tolerance that still applies, some sixty years later. The edition I obtained (at a thrift store) is copyrighted 1953 "as an unpublished work," and includes photos of the cast on stage: Deborah Kerr, John Kerr, Alan Sues, Dick York and Leif Erickson, among others. It's a great story, whether in play of movie form, and one I won't soon forget.

[Bruce Clark · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tom Lee (17) is in a boarding school for boys and is suspected of being a "fairy". To prove his manhood he attempts to bed Ellie, known to be an easy girl. The house master's new wife, Laura Reynolds, sympathizes with Tom and tries to help him out in his predicament. The play shows what happens when people jump to conclusions about others.

The play would not appeal to today's woke theater crowd but was quite a sensation on the 1950s.

[Kagey Bee · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great play. A little more explicit than the movie, but the movie was better because of the beautiful cinematography. A housemaster’s wife at a boarding school befriends an angsty teen boy whom everyone thinks is gay, and finds herself falling for him.

[Brian McCann · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well-written soap opera from the 1950s.

[Alan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Worth reading after watching the 1956 film based on the play.. Look at words and ideas that didn’t make it through the Motion Picture Production Code.

[Susann · Rating 3 out of 5]

A stoop find irresistible to any fan of the Tea & Sympathy Manhattan restaurant. Finally, I learned the origin of the "be kind" quote.

[Bella · Rating 4 out of 5]

Much gayer than the movie.