An Inspector Calls by John Boynton Priestly.

ESSAY - AN INSPECTOR CALLS

An Inspector Calls, is a post-war play of the year 1912 about a mysterious inspector Goole, who interrupts an engagement party at the home of the prosperous Birling family. John Boynton Priestly (the author), was a socialist. He believed that we live in a community, and have responsibility to look after others. He wrote “An Inspector Calls” not just as entertainment, but to show his beliefs, and share them with us. In this essay I intend to explore show the way that Priestley used the Inspector Goole to suggest his ideas about social responsibility.

The play is telling us about the way people should be responsible for others. He shows the audience his ideas by making them realise the characters roles in the death of Eva Smith and the consequences of their actions, and therefore their individual responsibility towards her and other people.

The play was is set in 1912. The importance of this is that in 1912 there was a much more drastic gap between the rich and the poor. For example in the upper-class, they’re are people like Mrs Birling, who think that people of lower classes are much lower than her family and should be looked down upon. An example of this is when Mr Birling compliments the cook: “Well, well – this is very nice. Very nice. Good dinner too Sybil. Tell cook from me.” She immediately replies “Arthur, your not supposed to say such things.” This suggests that Mrs Birling feels that the lower class should not be respected, or complimented, they are slaves. This is also an interesting view from a member of the Brumley Women’s “Charity” Organisation. Perhaps Mrs Birling was only part of this organisation because she had the money, the time, and wanted a ‘title’ or some sort of importance or leadership over people, as she was one of the main committee who decided whether applicants received

help or not.

In the lower classes, there were people like Eva Smith, a young woman, probably exploited by Mr Birling, who is an innocent victim of Mrs Birlings, and other members of the family’s thoughtless actions. The way that she was refused help when she most needed it, and the way that Sheila Birling used her authority to thoughtlessly get her sacked shows how unimportant the lower class was in those days.

The work force was full of lower-class people just trying to make a simple living. They were people like Eva Smith, exploited by people like Mr Birling. This is a prime example of one of the things that Priestly was against. There were no unions at that time so workers could not speak their mind or complain if they were not satisfied. No one was there to back them up, they had no rights, and no power. In a way they were slaves of these money-hungry upper class snobs.

The inspector, I thought was very mysterious. He is a very important dramatic device used in the play. He has a way of making the characters confess to him, and to themselves, their responsibility of Eva Smiths demise.

The Inspector has a different personality which makes him different from an ordinary policeman: he is more concerned with right and wrong than with what is legal. He sternly tells Birling, for example, that “it's better to ask for the earth

[as a worker might do] than to take it [which Birling tries to do].” He links their separate accounts together to form a full story or Eva Smith from when she leaves unemployment till when she commits suicide. But he also has another use which is a social conscience. He is the voice of J.B Priestley in the play. “We don't live alone. We are members of one body. We are responsible for each other." He also points out that "we have to share something. If nothing else, we'll have to share our guilt,” Which are all comments that sum up Priestly's way of thinking.

As an audience we never find out who the inspector actually is. There are many possibilities for example he could be the ghost of Eva Smith, coming back and getting revenge on them for her death, he could be just a hallucination because of all the wine that they had drunk or perhaps a spirit, that knows everything, and represents the future and is a chance for the Birling’s to change their ways before they suffer the consequences, but I think that only Eric and Sheila realise this as I will discuss further on. I think that the author ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

The inspector enters the play as Mr Birling is raving on about how “A man has to make his own way”, “A man has to mind his own business and look after himself and his own.” These emphasise the very capitalist views that Priestly was against. This is a significant moment, as this reinforces why I think that the inspector was sent to the Birlings- to teach them about social responsibility. Another point is that the inspector enters the play as a response to Birling’s opinions, he soon begins to tear down his ideas. He says “But the way some of these cranks talk and write now, you’d think everybody has to look after everybody else as if we’re all together like bees in a hive, community and all that nonsense” Which is another very clear example of how in the time of Priestly, people only seemed to look after themselves, there time and attention was not spent on community, but on themselves, wealth and profit I also think that this is ironic because J.B Priestly is describing himself as a “crank” but these views of Birling’s ended up in a dead girl.

Another thing he says is that "Public men Mr Birling, have responsibilities as well as privileges" to which Birling replies "…you weren't asked here to talk to me about my responsibilities." Which also emphasises the fact that the inspector was sent to the Birling household to teach them a lesson about social responsibility, as they no nothing at all

about it.

The inspectors final speech sums up exactly what Priestley was trying to get across. He lived through the war, which might have led him to believe that to live in a peaceful world a man must accept his responsibility towards other people. It is a very powerful speech that will move the audience and bring them to an emotional climax. He says “Eva Smith’s gone- but there are millions and millions of Eva Smiths and John Smiths still left with us, with their lives, their hopes and fears, their suffering and chance of happiness.” Which I think is a very powerful line. He is trying to portray to us and emphasise the fact that there is not just one Eva Smith, but an excellent example and representative of a whole class of people who are exploited by the Birlings and other upper class people like them. The inspectors message is not just that we should be kinder to each other, but that society needs to be organised in a fairer way which will make this more likely. For example the class system needs to be scrapped, and people should all be treated the same. The inspectors final message in this speech is when he says: “I tell you that a 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 is a very important line as it is fierce and commanding. This is a looking ahead to what happened in WW1, 2 years after the play was set. He is trying to say that if we do not learn our lesson and accept our social responsibility then people will rebel, there will be wars, fighting, killing, and violence, which we could relate to modern day life for example comparing the quality of life with Afghanistan and America, but in this case Eva smiths suicide. Another view of “Fire, blood and anguish” I think could be the more extremist, religious view of hell. Priestly believed that we should share our wealth, or atleast help the needy. To continue in the way that they did in the 1900’s would be unfair and would pull society apart, which is why we need to tear away the class system, and give proper rights to workers, women, and treat everyone fairly.

The questioning of all the characters suggests Priestley’s ideas about social responsibility. I am going to concentrate on 3 characters Mr Birling , Sheila and Gerald First off all I will briefly describe them and then go into detail about how they suggest ideas about social responsibility.

Arthur Birling is a “hard-headed business man” who believes that society should be the same. The rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. He is a snob, only interested in his business and wealth. He also believes that he will be knighted soon, which means that he has high expectations of himself. He does not care about anyone else, except himself, for example he wants his daughter to marry Gerald so he can have a part of the Croft business, not so his daughter is happy. He believes that “A man has to mind his own business and look after himself and his own”. Birling does not show Priestley’s ideas, which is interesting because he shows the complete opposite of them. There are certain things that Mr. Birling says in the play which shows that Priestley is trying to show us that his ideas are false. For example, he says “The titanic is unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable” and that “The Germans don’t want a war nobody wants a war”. All these things tell us about his ignorant ideas about society, as in reality we know that these things he said were not true. Titanic sunk on its maiden voyage and world war one broke out 2 years after the play was set. This is a reason why when I read the play I regarded Birling as someone foolish.

Mr Birling dismissed Eva Smith because after she came back from her holidays in August she became restless and asked for a minute wage increase. She was apparently one of the ring leaders who had “a lot to say”. I think a reason why Mr Birling sacked her was because he had no respect for the lower class, and would not tolerate someone from the lower class challenging his authority. Something to remember is that Eva could not challenge his decision because there were no workers rights, or unions in those days so she was alone. He also says: “I cannot accept any responsibility for her death .” which again emphasises his views and the fact that he does not feel he has any social responsibility for nearly everyone. Another example of Birling again showing his disregard for the lower class, and other people, is when he says that if Eva Smith did not like working in his company she could “Go and work somewhere else- it’s a free country.” This few is undermined by Eric who points out that “it isn’t, if you cant work somewhere else.”

When questioning Birling, inspector Goole shows a more and more personal attitude to Mr Birling, and believes entirely in what he is saying. Mr Birlings actions change within a few moments. At first, he and Gerald joke about the reasons for the inspectors visit, probably because he feels that he has nothing to fear because of his high status and contacts. He says “Don’t yammer and stammer with me man!” The inspector is stern towards Mr. Birling and keeps him under control, even though he is from a lower class. Priestly is trying to outrage the audience, stir up the emotions and bring out the corruption of the class system. When questioning Birling he makes it seem like money is the only thing that he is interested in. He repeatedly mentions the dead girl left on a slab, which is supposed to give Birling an image of sadness, and guilt. The inspector shows a stern attitude towards Birling, who tries to suggest that the inspector does not have any involvement in the way he chooses to run his business, which is yet another sign of Birlings lack of respect for other people. But he actually says: “I would pay thousands, thousands.” Money cannot buy you everything, and it cant even turn back time, the inspector points this out by saying “Your offering money at the wrong time!”

Sheila, Arthur Birlings daughter, is moved, shocked, and guilty. The inspector is successful and makes her see the consequences of her actions, and gets her too confess her involvement in Eva Smiths dismissal from Milwards. He does this by making Sheila feel awful,: “She wasn’t pretty when I saw her today, but she had been pretty-very pretty”, and then by showing her a photo of the girl. She is a sensitive character, who is shown as being young, attractive and honest. She is one of the very few characters who is actually affected by what the inspector reveals throughout the play. I think Priestly also used Sheila as a dramatic device, she is a reminder to the audience of the horrible death of Eva Smith as she is a very open character who expresses her feelings well. For example when she says: “I felt rotten at the time, but now I feel worse.” I think that an important reason that the inspector made an impression on Sheila was because Sheila being a young character was most likely to admit her blame and accept the consequences of her actions. It was only right for her to know that she was only partly to blame, which is why he encourages her to stay on and listen since so she doesn’t feel entirely responsible. Still, she is quick to realise the inspectors motives, and tries to warn the other members of her family not to lie about their previous actions as she knows that the inspector will find out eventually. She knows that he is going to expose everything, which is why the tries to hurry up the questioning. She even tries to warn her mother about not immediately admitting her responses.

Sheila displays exactly the opposite attitude to her father, like a voice of ‘reason, and right’ she is ready to learn from experience. She is left to learn from the mistakes of the older generation and ensure that they are not repeated.

The inspector tears Gerald apart. He appears to be the perfect gentleman, about to marry into a perfect life with a perfect partner. But he is tangled in a web of lies, deceit and corruption. Act 1 finished on a cliff hanger, where Gerald looks crushed, and scared that the inspector will find out about his relationship with Eva. In act 2 he is upset by his part in the destruction of the girls life, though he did try to deny knowing her at first as through the first part of the play, he feels completely relieved and innocent to any responsibility to her death. He acts differently towards Sheila. He says :” You’ve said your piece and your obviously going to hate this so why don’t you just leave us to it?” he is rude, distressed, and wants her to leave. In act 3, the inspector comments: “I don’t think any of you will forget, nor that young man Croft, though he at least had some affection for her and made her happy for a time.” Which suggests that he is not as critical of Gerald as he is of the others. I agree with him to a certain degree, he did make her happy for a time and gave her a home, unlike the others who exploited her and made her life a misery. But the fact that he just broke off with her, is unacceptable, especially under the circumstances that she was in. Still, I think that Gerald played a good part in her life, so I would place him last for responsibility of her death.

The inspector has more effect on Sheila and Eric than he does on Gerald and the Birlings. Sheila and Eric totally understand the ideas that the inspector says, where as the elder Birlings stubbornly stick to their own beliefs. He says “We often do on the young ones, they’re more impressionable.” I think this is Priestly saying that the younger generations are impressionable and would pay attention to the morals this play shows, and change ways of society. This is backed up at the end of the play when Eric and Sheila, the younger characters, are changed by the days events and feel as if they will never do things that will hurt people again. Another point I would like to relate to this is when Sheila talks about “building up a wall for the inspector will only knock it down.” You could refer this to the fact that the upper class build a wall around them, separating them from everyone else. They become trapped inside and forget what is going on with the outside world, only concentrating on what Is going on inside, they’re wealth. Then when the wall is knocked down they are not prepared for what is really going on.

Where as the older Birlings are completely ripped apart. Birling is more concerned about his public scandal than anything else, again showing the importance of his “status, and wealth”.

The inspector brings out the events of the play well, without him the characters secrets would never have come out. Birling could not see that he did anything memorable or wrong, by sacking a troublemaker, Sheila thought that her jealousy of the pretty shop assistant was “not anything terrible at the time”, Gerald needed to conceal his involvement with the girl from a jealous fiancée, Mrs Birling is too cold to ever “have known what the girl was feeling” and Eric had resorted to theft, which he needed to conceal from his father. Without the Inspector, each character would not have acknowledged what they had done, which is why I think “An Inspector Calls” Brings the plays events together well.

I think that this play was well made, it holds the attention of the audience well by using climaxes. I also like the detective “whodunit” style, which is more than just a detective thriller, you really have to look closely at it before you fully understand the morals and meanings of the story. Throughout the play I have learnt a lot about the Birlings, their good qualities, and their weaknesses. I think Priestleys aim was to explain to us that if we are like the Birlings then we need to change, and be more considerate, more caring towards others. He emphasises this in the final Speech of inspector Goole, when he says: “We are all members of one body, we are responsible for each other.” I am sure that there will always be a sense of mystery to this play, as J.B Priestly has left us with unanswered questions; who was the inspector? What was the inspector? Will we ever know?