A Production of An inspector calls

play I questioned why Birling was so pleased with the engagement. From remarks such as "perhaps we may look forward to the time when Crofts and Birlings are no longer competing but are working together- for lower costs and higher prices" this makes me think that this is a comfortable arrangement as he knows that his business rivals will soon be part of the family. It also suggests that he is aware that the arrangement will lead to bigger profits, which leads to more wealth. This unfortunately leads to more greed at the expense of those less fortunate. It is showing that he´s selfishly concerned more with his wealth than with his daughters happiness. Birling is also very concerned about his social status, especially about his proposed knighthood. Aurthur Birling is shown to be a very self concerned man.When he discovers that he started the pandemonium with the dead girl, he feels he can not accept responsibility. He says "she´d had a lot to say - far too much- she had to go." This shows that although Birling may be a self made man he´s become greedy as he´s forgot where he came from. I think he may have took too much off his own medicine " ….a man has to make his own way and has to look after himself." He has no respect for the lower class which is why he sacked 'Eva Smith´ and "cannot accept responsibility" for her death.I felt that the performance could have made a bigger and more dramatic effect of her death. Most of the actors didn´t seen too bothered that somebody had died. I feel that the death of somebody is such an emotion that is extremely powerful that the actors could have showed more emotion.Margaret Tyzack made a very good job of showing Sybil Birling as a very cold hearted women with no remorse of her actions towards the 'girl´. Her cold looks and stern voice made her come across as the vindictive middle aged woman of the performance. The actress shows well how Mrs. Birling was so untouched by such a sad event, even if it was a hoax. The actress made a good job at showing how Sybil Birling felt her family were near to perfect, when actually she couldn´t have been further from the truth. The irony in the play came across well as Mrs. Birling told the inspector to "go and look for the father of the child. It´s his responsibility." When the child in question was actually her very own Grandchild. This was when she was questioned on her actions of rejecting 'the girl´s´ plea for help from the Brumley Women´s Charity Organisation, the charity that Mrs. Birling so happened to be in the seat of. Mrs. Birling was the only character who remained untouched by the inspectors harsh but true words.Sheila Birling (Sarah Berger) was shown as a young woman who actually realised what the intentions of Inspector Goole were. I thought she looked a bit young for the part but nevertheless she played the part well. Berger could have put more emphasis into the scenes where Gerald was concerned. The actress showed well how Sheila appeared to be the voice of reason within the play. It seemed as if the director wanted Sheila to appear as a dainty character who felt responsible for the death of the girl. Even when Inspector Goole was exposed she seemed concerned over her family´s actions. Unlike the other characters who laughed it off, those characters who seemed more concerned about business arrangements and themselves.Eric (David Sibley) however I felt was the downfall of the performance. I felt that he was too old to play the part of Eric. I had visioned him as a wealthy bachelor, not a 30 something shabby chap in a tuxedo. He didn´t put enough emphasis into his emotional scenes with his mother (Act 3). I also feel that Eric´s intoxicated behaviour could have been emphasised more. It seemed as if David Sibley was very unemotional and didn´t even try to get into the part of Eric Birling. In Act 3 when Eric finds out that his mother refused the 'girl´ any help, I imagined this to be really intense. Unfortunately I felt it quite disheartening. Even though Priestley gives stage directions "nearly at breaking point" about Eric´s behaviour. I felt the performance was let down in a way. Especially when Eric said "damn you, damn you." I was hoping that this would be fierce and through glowing eyes of intensity. Instead it was more of a pussy growl with a twitch of temperament. I also fell that Eric´s mystery was not shown very well. Lines such as "suddenly I felt I just had to laugh" and "Yes, I remember……," - "Nothing." These lines weren´t preserved long enough to show the irony of the play. Remarks such as this hint at the 'mystery´ of the rest of the play. It shows that although the Inspector has not yet called, Eric already has something on his conscience that is making him feel guilty.I feel that the Inspector had the most important role of this play. In this performance the Inspector was played by Bernard Hepden, and very well indeed. In this play Priestly was using Inspector Goole as a conscience calling to the other characters. This was shown well in the performance through Inspector Goole´s attitude and the other characters responses.Gerald Croft was also played well by Simon Ward. In the play he appeared to be the perfect gentleman, about to marry into a perfect life with the perfect partner. However as shown in the performance he was also tangled in a web of lies, deceit and corruption. Simon Ward used a variety of facial gestures to show the character´s part well. Especially when Sheila said 'He knows everything´ about the Inspector. On the face of it Gerald appears to regret what happened with he 'girl´. However I don´t think Gerald was very good when proving that Inspector Goole was a hoax.The aim of 'An Inspector Calls´ is to make people more aware of how they treat others. As in 'every action has a consequence´. It was a performance that was a revolution that ended very bitterly. The play was written in 1945, yet it was set in 1912. Therefore J. B. Priestley had the benefit of hindsight, as we can see from comments about the titanic and how there was no possibility of war. This hindsight was shared with the viewer, as we could to see what Priestly was hinting at.The play was symbolic. In the play I thought it was very clever the pun of the inspectors surname. 'Goole´ could be linked with either fool or ghoul. Fool to show that the Birlings and Gerald Croft were fools and ghoul because the inspector him self was actually one. I felt he was more of a collective conscience of the family because they had all at least committed one of the seven deadly sins. These are pride, covetousness, lust, envy, glutton, anger and sloth.J.B Priestley is attacking the privileges of class in this play. He is saying that there should be more equality and we shouldn´t take our lifestyles for granted. We also should take responsibility for our actions or we could end up in an awful situation, just as the Birlings and Gerald did when they received the phone call at the end to say an inspector was on his way round.I liked this cliff hanger ending as the audience gets to decide the next act in their conscience. It was done well in the play as the characters were shown to be absolutely stunned. Then the titles rolled for the end cue, leaving the viewer with the opportunity to change their ways now, before it´s too late.The production did actually get J.B Priestley´s view of responsibility across well. Birling in one of his profound and longwinded speeches actually says, " a man has to make his own way - has to look after himself- and his family too, of course, when he has one - and so long as he does that he won´t come to much harm. But the way some cranks talk and write now, you´d think everyone has to look after everyone else, as if we were all mixed up together like bees in a bee hive - community and all that nonsense ….. a man has to mind his own business, himself and his own." This view ended the family in the awful position that they did with Inspector Goole. Ironically J. B Priestly is actually describing himself as a crank from Birlings views.Even though the Birlings are subjected to such a grilling over their thoughtless actions by the inspector some of them still didn´t realise the intentions of Inspector Goole. He is trying to make them aware and responsible of their actions towards others. Sheila Birling does actually try to show her family as the Inspector fed her a greedy portion of humble pie. That is the problem; greed. The characters have become far too greedy. They feel that the lower classes are so different and far apart from them. Sad really when something so horrible such as suicide occurs. Without the inquiry they would have had no idea of what they did.It seems as if money makes Authur Birlings´ world go round. When Inspector Goole repeatedly talks about the girl lying dead on the mortuary slab it is supposed to create an image of pity and sadness to any human with a soul. However Arthur Birling actually says: " I would pay thousands, thousands …" Money cannot buy you everything, it can not even turn back time. The Inspector even points this out by saying "you´re offering money at the wrong time Mr. Birling."The Inspector makes it very clear in Act 3 that the Birlings were responsible for the death of that girl. Mr. Birling started it and Mrs. Birling ended it, all down to their very own self concern. Even if it was a hoax, it is still clear that what they have done is still wrong, to who ever it effected.The Inspector leaves by telling the family that it is too late to change what they have done, they must live with their sins forever. They cannot even say 'sorry´ to the once pretty, but now very un-pretty girl they all thought they knew. She had been pretty but their sins and actions turned her into the un-pretty pregnant mess that lay stone cold dead on the mortuary slab.The inspector gives a very long analysis of the Birlings actions as he leaves. He talks about how we are members of one body and should take care of each other. I feel this speech is all what Priestley is trying to say in this one speech given by the inspector, the conscience of the play. He says that if this lesson is not learned then they will be taught it "in fire and blood and anguish". This was said excellently in the production. He had a stern look on his face that made my hairs stand on end, as it was so harsh yet meaningful. It showed exactly what Priestley wanted, to show the audience and the Birlings that if they don´t take notice now then the consequences will get worse, as in war. War with blood, fire and anguish. Like the one Priestley served in himself. Perhaps this play was J. B. Priestley´s feelings of World War I, an emotion unleashed in his writing.Over all the production was fairly well done. I don´t think Priestley would have turned in his grave, yet I don´t think he would have gave it a standing ovation. His views and criticisms did come through in the production. The play was a moralistic mystery that made the audience think. It gives you time to change your actions towards others. That is before an Inspector calls on you, to teach you in 'blood and fire and in anguish.´