A bit further on in the play when Sheila is trying to tell Mr Birling that even though they think nobody has died, the whole situation should have taught them something, Mr Birling shows again that he hasn’t learned anything. When speaking to Sheila. He says:
Well here’s to us. Come on, Sheila, don’t look like that. All over now.
The fact that he says that everything is “over now” again shows the audience that he didn’t care about the girl’s death and was just solely worried about the news getting about and people gossiping. He hasn’t learned that his actions affect other people’s lives, and even a near death experience didn’t change him – so probably nothing would.
Mr Birling’s wife and other half Sybil Birling also plays a key role in the play and is although has aspects of her husbands personality, she differs slightly. Priestly uses Sybil as a great dramatic effect by a few different ways and I will be analysing the different ways. Firstly, she is very prejudice towards people of an inferior class and believes they don’t deserve much, and don’t deserve other people’s respect. She is very much aware of all the differences between the socials classes and wants everything to stay that way. She is irritated when Mr Birling makes the social blunder of praising their own cook in front of Gerald and later on in the play is extremely flippant of Eva Smith. Saying:
Girls of that class . . .
This very small extract shows us that she thinks many people are inferior to others and don’t deserve any respect.
Another aspect of her character that is an interesting point is that she seems largely unaware of the real world. She is shocked by Gerald's rundown of Alderman Meggarty and appalled to hear Sheila say that Eric drinks to an excessive amount. Even when Gerald admits to a drink problem, she still refuses to believe it later in the play. When we start to learn the details of Gerald's affair she comments:
It would be much better if Sheila didn't listen to this stuff at all.
In fact it is she who needs protecting, and not Sheila. She doesn’t thin anybody in her family could be responsible for anything and this shows complete and downright arrogance. Throughout the play there are several instances of her obvious arrogance – the way in which she uses her social position and wealth to try and intimidate the Inspector:
You know of course that my husband was Lord Mayor only two years ago and that he’s still a magistrate.
This quote again shows that she is too conceited and like her husband very much driven by self-achievement and satisfaction.
Her reactions towards Gerald are rather uncritical. When she learns of his affair she seems at first to be disgusted. However, once he has established that there was no suicide and that they are out of trouble, she starts believing he was good and treating him as the favoured future son-in-law:
I must say Gerald you've argued this very cleverly, and I'm most grateful.
This quote shows us that even though he had cheated on her own daughter, the fact that he seemed to have manoeuvred the family out of a mess and, as it appeared, kept their reputation superlative, she liked him again. This shows us that Mrs Birling had a shallow side to her and was mainly bothered about appearances.
An additional way in which she is hypocritical is in her disapproval of the father of Eva's child. At first she believed passionately in what she was saying (about the father being responsible for Eva’s suicide), until of course she realised Eric was the father. From her on, her whole attitude and views are reversed. As with Mr Birling and Gerald, she is unable to understand why Eric and Sheila are so upset at the end of the play. She lives in her own secluded, honoured world and has no idea of community responsibility at all. Her final comment is that:
In the morning they'll be as amused as we are.
This sums up her character exactly and perfectly. It tells everybody the unbelievable unawareness and ignorance of the vast change that has come over her children, as well as her own total lack of regret and sorrow for her own actions.
Priestley again uses Mrs Birling as an example of how the stereotypical ‘rich’ person thought, behaved and acted. He was trying to use her as a dramatic device to again try and turn the rest of the population against such people, and to try and encourage people to make a stand and difference.
Another main character that Priestley’s uses well in the play is Sheila Birling. She was due to get married to Gerald Croft until the inspector came over and revealed all of Gerald’s untold stories with other women. One aspect of her personality which is obvious to the audience is that although she maybe was the most childish and stubborn at first but she has realised her mistakes in life and is willing to change her ways. There are many examples in the play which say to the audience that she has grown up and changed. Firstly at the beginning of the play when the inspector had just arrived and was talking, Sheila said to him (regarding Eva Smith’s suicide):
You talk as if we’re responsible
At this point in the play Sheila is very immature and is quick to deny any charges against her. She believes that she could not possibly do any wrong and that the inspector is wrong to judge them. Later on in the play, after everything has been revealed, Sheila realises that she has done wrong and says:
I behaved badly too. I know I did. I’m ashamed of it.
This change in thought shows us that as the play as progressed, developed and changed so has Sheila’s personality. At first she was just like the other members of the family, stubborn and refusing the listen to the inspector, but as the play has developed she has also. She, along with Eric, are the only two members of the family to learn from their mistakes are realise that their actions do affect other people. Sheila feels guilty for all her actions and regrets her past doings. Priestly uses her as an example of how some people, if given a hand to hold, can be transformed from selfish and greedy to caring and thoughtful.
Another aspect of Sheila that needs to be looked at is her obvious perceptiveness. At the beginning she realises that Gerald knew Daisy Renton (Eva Smith) from his reaction:
(Startled) What? . . . . .(pulling himself together) D’you mind if I give myself a drink Sheila?
When Gerald reacted like this, Sheila immediately picked up on the fact that in his other doings in life, a Daisy Renton had somewhere crossed his path. More significantly and importantly if the fact that she is the first to wonder who the inspector really is, saying to him wonderingly:
I don’t understand about you?
This shows us that she doesn’t, unlike the others, just believe he is a simple detective and that there is more than meets the eye to the detective. Also later on she warns the other members of the family:
He’s giving us the rope – so that we’ll hang ourselves
This shows us that she realises the games that the inspector is playing, and by the end is probably the cleverest out of the lot. Contrasting to the other members of the family, she knows that the inspector is making the family dig their own holes, holes that are too deep to climb out of. Priestley’s uses this aspect of Sheila’s character to tell the audience that the youngest and more innocent could in fact be the cleverest, and that they should always be allowed to voice their opinions and be taken seriously.
Sheila also changes as the play progresses and Priestley uses this point to his advantage to show that people can actually change and learn from their mistakes if given sufficient directions.
Sheila’s ‘was to be’ husband Gerald is also a key member and part of the play. He is the son of Sir George and Lady Croft and he is in his thirties and is a rather confident character. In the play he is described as:
An attractive chap about thirty, rather too manly to be a dandy but very much the easy well-bred man-about-town.
This description tells us about his outer character but doesn’t inform us about his inner character. At the beginning of the play he is, unlike Sheila, unwilling to admit to playing a part in Eva’s life. He pretends to the inspector that he never even knew the girl but as everybody knows, he did. We can tell that he was quick to deny any charges and wanted a cover up because when Sheila confronted him about the whole affair he says:
So – for God’s sake – don’t say anything to the Inspector . . . We can keep it from him.
This shows us that he is unwilling to take on responsibility and admit to playing a part in Eva’s Life. Unlike Sheila he is worried about his own personal interests, and like Mr Birling he is very wary and wants to solely to protect them. He is very naive and believes that he can keep things away from the inspector, when clearly and obviously he can’t.
Another part of his character that differs from Sheila’s and sways towards Mr Birling’s personality is that at the end he hasn’t actually learnt anything and wants life to continue as before. He is the first to think that the inspector Goole might not in fact have been an office:
That man wasn't a police officer.
He puts together a theory that maybe there was in fact more than one ‘Eva Smith’ and perhaps the Inspector was showing them all different photographs. Although this part shows that Gerald has the ability to reason clearly and to act positively, it shows us just how determined he was to clean his slate. He rings the infirmary to confirm all of his thoughts and suspicions and when the time he realises that he was right. He is quickly to absolve all of his guilt and responsibility in any death.
Everything’s all right now, Sheila (hols up ring.) What about this ring?
This shows us that he believes that everything is alright because it hasn’t apparently happened and that he can’t see his actions could affect other people’s lives. Like Sheila’s parents this quote shows us that he has no understanding of Sheila's true feelings. Unlike Sheila who does everything to try and change herself, Gerald is more trying to protect himself. He is extremely oblivious to Sheila and Eric’s arguments that what happened still happened, and their actions could have driven a girl to commit suicide, and take the life of her unborn baby.
Although there are aspects of Mr Birling’s personality he is also willing to accept responsibility for Eva’s death and is upset by what he has helped cause. He feels guilty but does not like to convey his emotions. We know he feels guilty as he asks the inspector if he may be alone for a while and tells the inspector that he was:
Rather more upset by this business than I probably appear to be.
This shows us that he was upset and hurt by what he believed he had done to Eva Smith (Daisy Renton) and felt guilty, yet at the same time didn’t want to admit his involvement. He is a mixture of both the older and younger Birlings. Like Eric and Sheila as he is willing to accept and admit responsibly for Eva’s death and is upset by what he help happen. But he is a capitalist like Mr Birling and believed that a man has a right to become wealthy at the cost of others. Probably more important, as with Mr and Mrs Birling, his ending gives him away and his attitude at the end is that since no girl has actually died, then nothing that he has done really matters. This shows us that he didn’t learn anything and was more bothered about appearances.
J.B Priestley uses this character to tell the audience even the growing up rich people still had vein and image driven sides. He uses Gerald as an example of how people can seem one thing and actually be another. Gerald is not a complete individual and J.B Priestley makes great use of this fact. He ensures that Gerald is stuck between two different types of people and this makes the audience understand what problems some richer people face.
The youngest member of the family is Eric, who like Sheila, is in his early twenties. We are told in the opening notes that he is:
Not quite at ease, half shy, half assertive unlike Gerald who is quite self-confident.
This conception of Eric is evident in the whole play as he is uncomfortable and awkward right from the start. The fist mention of him in the script is
Eric suddenly guffaws,
After this outburst he is not capable of explaining his amusement, as if he is anxious about something. Throughout the whole play we find out that he is quite an anxious and worried person.
The most significant part of Gerald’s personality is although he was irresponsible and immature at first he has learned from his mistakes and wants to change. We know this because when talking with the rest of the family he says:
You lot may be letting yourselves off lightly but I can’t
This tells us that he has realised he has made mistakes and is wanting to chance and move forward in life.
Another aspect of his responsibility is that he is appalled by his parents’ inability to admit their own responsibility. He tells them forcefully:
I'm ashamed of you.
When his own father tries to threaten him in Act III, Eric is aggressive in return:
I don't give a damn now.
Eric has probably never spoken to his father in such a tone before but now realises that everything is out of control and he doesn’t want to hide his emotions any more.
J.B Priestley uses Eric, like Sheila, as an example of people who can learn if they are shown the light. Eric appeals to all the younger audience and they will think that if Eric can change then, if helped; more people could change and be shown a better way.
Probably the most important person in the play is Inspector Goole. On his entrance in the play he is describe as:
An impression of massiveness, solidity and purposefulness. He is a man in his fifties, dressed in a plain darkish suit... He speaks carefully, weightily, and has a disconcerting habit of looking hard at the person he addresses before actually speaking.
We know right from the beginning that he was a man who liked to be in control and throughout the play many more examples of his ‘always in control’ attitudes are shown. Firstly, when Eric was being questioned about his involvement and wanted a drink, Mr Birling refused but the inspector overruled the decision and said:
He needs a drink just to see him through
This shows us that he was in control all the time. Even though he was in Mr Birling’s house and Mr Birling said that Eric wasn’t allowed a drink, the inspector used his given power and allowed Eric that little drink.
Another part of his character is that the Inspector shows that he is calm and conducts inquires rationally, as emphasises by his insistence on one person and one line of inquiry at a time. We know that he had a set routine and had planned ahead with each character as he said:
Don’t start on that I want to get on
This shows us that before he had entered the house he had a planned set of questioned with a planned order. He wasn’t going to let any member of the family ruin this order which shows us that he was calm as he never exploded out at them.
His final speech sums up his personality. In the speech he says:
We don’t live alone. We are members of one body. We are responsible for each other.
This speech is more like a sermon or a politician’s speech than a detective’s last one. He leaves the family with the message that they are not only responsible for themselves but for each other and warns them that if they don’t listen then something could happen.
All the mystery surrounding the Inspector, and the fact that maybe he isn’t a real person puts doubts into the views minds, he could be a ghost (Goole – ghoul), the voice of Priestley, the voice of God or the voice of all our consciences. The inspector is seen as a symbol of honest and of treating each other respectfully and correctly. It is slightly ironic that he appeals to be the symbol of honesty when he in fact is a mystery man whose identity is not exposed.
The Inspectors identity is not the only ironic part of the play, there are many more that Priestley has used. He uses irony as a key dramatic technique to make a strong point about the Birling family, which will be evident later on. There are many cases of this as the play unravels, and the most common type of irony is when one of the characters stats facts that the audience understand to have opposite meaning or are false. One of the most obvious examples of irony is when Mr Birling, at the beginning of the play, is talking to the rest of the family members and says:
And I’m talking as a hard-headed, practical man of business. And I say there isn’t a chance of war. The word’s developing so fast that it’ll make war impossible. Look at the progress we’re making. In a year or two we’ll have aeroplanes that will be able to go anywhere. And look at the way the auto-mobile’s making headway – bigger and faster all the time. And then ships. Why, a friend of mine went over this new liner last week – the Titanic – she sails next week – forty-six thousand eight hundred tons – forty-six thousand eight hundred tons – New York in five days – and every luxury – and unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable. . . In twenty or thirty years’ time – let’s say, in 1940 – you may be giving a little party like this, your son or daughter might be engaged – and I tell you, by that time you’ll be living in a world that’ll have forgotten all these Capital versus Labour agitations and all these silly little war scares. There’ll be peace and prosperity and rapid progress everywhere – except of course in Russia, which will always be behind naturally.
This quote is one of the best examples of irony in the whole play. There are a few main parts of the long quote (which are underlined) that are extremely ironic. Firstly, the fact that Mr Birling says, positively sure, that there “isn’t a chance of war” tells the audience about his personality. The audience know that war happened on two occasions and that Mr Birling was wrong in his definite prediction. Since he had been wrong about there not being any war, the audience is made to think that anything else the Mr Birling said and says would also have been untrue. Also to back up the audiences mind about what Mr Birling saying to be false, he says that the Titanic was unsinkable and it sunk. He also says that by 1940 there would be “peace and prosperity” in the world and the audience knows that by this time, they were in the middle of another world war. This again underlines that most of the things Mr Birling says and predicts are untrue and completely the opposite. Another thing in these mini speech that Mr Birlings predicts and that the audience again know to not be the case, is when he says that Russia “will always be behind naturally” when in fact they caught up with everyone.
After Mr Birling’s speech, in which ironic comments are coming from all corners, there are many more examples throughout the play where J.B Priestley use’s irony. Firstly, just when the play is beginning and there is no Inspector Goole on the scene, Mr Birling and Gerald are having a conversation about their families being rewarded and him being given a knighthood. When speaking to Gerald him tells him everything should be good in the future for them as long as they do not get into any mischief:
So long as we behave ourselves, don’t get into the police court or start a scandal – eh? (Laughs complacently.)
This quote is extremely ironic for a number of reasons. Firstly he is laughing and joking about going to court, as he believes he never will, but he doesn’t realise that just a few minutes away an inspector is waiting to pounce and accuse him of playing a part in a suicide. The audience realise that this will happen whilst Mr Birling doesn’t and can’t see any member of the Birling family ever committing a crime. Another reason for its irony is because he thinks that his family is much to well-off and important to ever commit a crime and be found, especially charged for it. The fact that he laughs complacently at the end tells us he believes it is ridiculous to even think about anybody close to him being charged or sent to court. This tells us that again Mr Birling regards himself as extremely important.
After these two most obvious ironic comments, there are also many more cleverly placed in the play. One of these deeply involves Mrs Birling. At first when the Inspector was questioning her she was adamant she had nothing to do with the case and it didn’t involve her:
I’ve done nothing wrong – and you know it
After he showed her the picture and informed her in fact that she was involved, the tides turned and soon Eric was obstinate, and said to his mother:
Then – you killed her!
This set of revelations makes Mrs Birling look quite asinine and is ironic because she was adamant that it had nothing to do with her, when in fact it had everything to do with her and by the end even her own son is blaming her for the death of Eva Smith. Again this ironic comment is used to great effect by J.B Priestly.
Priestley makes many ironic comments for a few reasons. The first reason is that he wants to prove a point to the audience by making these sarcastic comments. He wants the audience to see the floors in the Birlings thinking and philosophies and wants to turn them against the family. He believed that by turning them against the family then he would put a doubt in their mind about every other rich family, maybe believing they would think that every rich family would act, think and do the same things as what the Birlings do. He uses ironic comments particular in the case of Mr Birling by making him say things that the audience know to be false and completely wrong, he does this because he wants to turn everybody against him.
Another reason for the use of ironic comments by J.B Priestly is to give the audience an advantage over the characters in the play and let us become more involved. He wants the audience to know more than the characters so that they can understand decisions and judgements that are made by each character, so it allows us to determine their character.
Another dramatic affect that J.B Priestley uses to ultimate effect is the timing of the play. The actual play is written in ‘real-time’ (as explained above) which simply means that the story lasts exactly same length as the play on stage. The effect of the timing is crucial to grab the audience’s attention and emphasis points. One of main timing examples is when the characters enter and leave rooms at certain times to create a special feeling in the audience that they are more involved than maybe they are showing.
Probably the best example of fantastic timing in the play is when the inspector arrives at the Birlings house and rings the doorbell the exact same time that Mr Birling has just given his speech about his impending knighthood and about how "a man has to look after himself and his own." This irruption is essential because the inspector has arrived at the time when Mr Birling is boosting the most, and the inspector is going to prove that Mr Birlings ‘look after ourselves and everything will be ok’ philosophy is wrong. This interruption tells the audience that something is going to happen, regarding Mr Birling and the Inspector, to do with Mr Birling’s philosophy so the audience senses something. Timing is essential and makes the reader understand why and how things happen as they do.
The setting and location of the play is also a very important part of it. At the very beginning of the play Priestly describes the scene in detail so the audience has an immediate impression of a:
Heavily comfortable house.
This makes the audiences immediately think that the Birlings are rich and that there is much of a social difference than where Eva Smith lived. The location and setting of the play is always constant (everything happens in same place) which makes the situation seem more realistic. If it was set in different years etc then everything would seem less believable but the fact it is set at the same time makes everything seem truer.
Priestley deliberately set his play in 1912 because the date represented an era when all was very different from the time he was writing. In 1912, rigid class and gender boundaries seemed to ensure that nothing would change. Yet by 1945, most of those class and gender divisions had been breached. Priestley wanted to make the most of these changes. Through this play, he encourages people to seize the opportunity the end of the war had given them to build a better, more caring society.
Another dramatic effect that was used is the lighting that was there. Priestley says that the lighting should be “pink and intimate” before the Inspector arrives – “a rose-tinted glow” - when it becomes "brighter and harder." The lighting reflects the mood of the play, and Priestley makes the audience feel different moods at different times because of it.
The scene is set in a house and is always in the same place, rarely if ever changing scenes. The fact that the whole play is always in the relatively large house means there could be a sense of claustrophobia in there. We can see this is obviously true if we analyse the actions of Gerald Croft. Whilst in the house he is very edgy about the whole situation when he realises he had been involved with the Eva Smith. His head is mixed up and he could not think clearly about the whole situation, making rash decisions and judgements. He foolishly believes that he could have tricked the clever inspector by pretending to not know the inspector:
For God’s sake – don’t say anything to the inspector . . . we can keep it from him!
This shows how foolish Gerald is by believing he could actually keep knowledge from the ‘God-like’ figure Inspector Goole. This strange mode of thinking and irrational judgements could be Gerald’s personality or in fact it could be the claustrophobia in the house. Later on in the play Gerald leaves the house to clear his thoughts:
I’ll just go out – walk about – for a while, if you don’t mind. I’ll come back.
After he has been outside and walked around in the fresh air he returns a new and better thinking person. He is the first one to think that maybe the inspector isn’t actually real and he initiates the whole process of finding out:
I say – there’s no more real evidence we did than there was that that chap was a police officer.
He begins to questions the whole existence of the inspector and leads the family forward and helps them reveal the truth.
This amazing change in personality by Gerald is simply the fact that he left the claustrophobic house and went for a walk, clearing his thoughts. J.B Priestley uses the tight compact of the family as a dramatic technique to say to the audience that people’s thoughts aren’t always as clear as possible and that if they are given space they can think much more clearer.
The final dramatic effect that I will briefly cover is the clever ending by J.B Priestley. The clever ending leaves the audience wanting more, a kind of cliff-hanger effect. In the final act the Birling’s believed that they were off the hook and when it is discovered that the Inspector was actually a fake and that no girl had died in the infirmary they thought they had escaped. Everybody believes that it is sorted which releases the majority of the tension yet the final telephone call changes everything again. The fact that somebody tells the family that a real inspector is on his way to ask questions about the suicide of a young girl, restores very dramatically all of the previously lost tension. J.B Priestley ends this play very cunningly as it is a much unforeseen twist.
The play contains many deep meanings and dramatic techniques which must all be summarised. Priestly wrote an inspector calls for a few different reasons as he was trying to achieve many different things by drafting this specific play. Firstly, Priestley had become very worried about the class distinctions between upper class and lower class people and believed that this should be halted. One of the main reasons for writing this play was to inform the rest of the unaware world about these inequalities and for them to realise what was happening and to try and change it. He believed that if everybody realised how unequal the world was, and everybody tried to change and do something about it, people could be treated the same. Priestley believed that any future disagreement and world wars could be avoided through cooperation and mutual respect between countries and between people. His play, An Inspector Calls, was hinting and telling everybody all about these disparities.
Thorough the play, we realise about Priestley’s views and opinions mainly through the character of Inspector Goole. It could be said that Priestly was Goole but in a different era and context. Most of the ideas and philosophies that come from the inspector, Priestly felt himself and this is none more so obvious than in his last speech:
Just remember this. One Eva Smith has gone – but there are millions and millions and millions of Eva Smith’s and John Smith’s still left with us, with their lives, their hopes and fears, their sufferings and chance of happiness, all intertwined with our lives, and what we think and say and do. We don’t live alone. We are members of one body. We are responsible for each other. And I tell you that the time will soon come when, if men will not learn that lesson, then they will be taught it in fire and blood and anguish.
This last speech from the inspector in the play is one of most obvious examples of when Priestley is speaking through the inspector. We know from this that Priestley believes everybody helps each other and that we all play different parts in other peoples lives. This idea from Priestly contradicts that of the belief of Mr Birling, who believes we should only look after ourselves and family. The fact that in the end of the play Mr Birling has not learnt anything and that he, in context, looses the “battle” appeals to the audience that Birling’s philosophy is wrong and the inspectors – Priestley’s – is right.
The actual dramatic effects are very successful and get across the right views that the writer wanted. The strongest dramatic effect is probably the characters as they appeal to the audience more as they can relate to what they believe. His aims for the play to decrease inequalities and he made his points very clear and achieved his aims well. The audience will pay attention to what he is saying and take to note the message.
