It is here Mr Birling paints the true portrait of himself to us the audience and shows that not only is he a rich swaggering man of high standing, but a selfish, arrogant and shrewd one too. He leaves the interior of the house and comes out into full view of the audience with Gerald Croft upon the balcony outside and proceeds to lecture him upon a man’s duty- first and foremost to himself then as an after thought his family but then responsibility stops.
“But the way some of these cranks (Socialists) talk and write now, you’d think everybody has to look after everybody else, as if we’re all mixed up together like bees in a hive- community and all that nonsense.”
The idea of helping or aiding others, to him is preposterous- you can almost hear his sneering ridiculing tone- Gerald and his son Eric do nothing to correct him and instead are listening intently almost to the older man- taking in his words. From what he says, you begin to feel a certain disgust at this man who talks so fluently and certainty that the war which is to kill millions- is simply rumours and nothing more-
“And I say there isn’t a chance of war….progress we’re making…automobiles…ships…Titanic sails next week- 46800 tonnes- every luxury- unsinkable- absolutely unsinkable”
To the 1945 audience, these words would have had a great effect for Mr Birling was echoing what some of them were and had been before the whole world it seemed, crashed. His certainty and prideful ignorance would have touched some deeply – the war had been brutal and painful as well as the loss of the ‘unsinkable’ Titanic and all because they had not pulled down barriers and muffled their pride- it would have shattered any remaining doubts about Mr Birling’s character being anything other then what I have described above and made him into a figure of ridicule as both of his emphatic statements in due course, turn out to be exactly the opposite.
Shortly after Birling’s speech, the Inspector arrives. In Priestley’s production of this, it would have been a sudden, unexpected arrival- the doorbell ringing and Edna ushering him in. The modern interpretation is much more hooking and captivating- mainly because we have the view outside the enclosed house. In this performance, the Inspector appears much earlier then his announcement and for the most part stands silent and guardful underneath the dim lamppost in the centre of the stage outside the Birling’s house- and by doing so overhears everything that Birling says- his pride, ignorance, selfishness- the lot. The way the Inspector appears upon the stage, sparks a lot of questions. While the Birling’s celebrate inside, he enters from a red phone box- the sort which is common everywhere but would not have been in 1912. Dressed in 1945 clothes of a bowler hat and a long beige over coat he adds a new atmosphere to the play- a tense atmosphere- we know now that something is going to happen.
He is definitely a time traveller but why such a sense of purpose and calm? –it gives you no doubt he has travelled before and knows exactly what he is up to.
However though he is dressed well, he does not seem to intimidate the young boys playing in the street- on the contrary he seems to be fatherly and kindly figure- giving out an orange to one after a bit of teasing- another clue to his that he comes from another time as oranges are a thing unheard of in that period to that class.
When the two men, Birling and the Inspector meet, Priestley makes it a civilised meeting- wine is offered, formalities exchanged before the reason for his visit is explained and the questioning explodes. The Royal National Theatre production leans more towards the more dynamic and symbolic approach. Instead of a civilised technique it turns into a shouting match- each (Birling and the Inspector) trying to show that they are the greater power with Birling finally relenting and agreeing to be questioned.
As soon as this occurs the house opens- as if it is a dolls house, it opens up and the whole interior is bared for the world’s examination. This is greatly symbolic in itself. Before, the house and the Birling’s had been shut off- secluded from the rest of the world, but now the Inspector has made them open up and their lives are exposed.
The National Theatre production does however blend in Priestley’s idea of involving the audience and making us part of the play by making us witnesses to the case being investigated. This is mainly apparent in Shelia’s confession, in which instead of turning and speaking to the Inspector who is questioning her, she stops and turns to us the audience- the world. She is not mentally conscious that we are there but knows what she is doing- she is letting the world into her life instead of trying to block it out. Another example of collaborating with the audience is in Eric’s reentrance after it has been brought to light that Eva Smith was Eric’s mistress and carried his baby. On the stage dry ice is put into use and a thick smoke screen envelopes one side of the stage from which a crowd of lower class people appear in – led by the Inspector- more witnesses for the Birling’s realisation of their responsibility. It is then that Eric runs on stage and is faced by the people and his family and more importantly the true horror of his crime. At that moment the lights on the audience come on and are all visible whereas before they had been in the dark. This symbolizes that though we may not have been apparent before, we have always been there- judging and watching them but only when the truth is finally unraveled do they finally accept us.
All the way through the play, Eva Smith has been the focus point of the performance- the scapegoat of the Birling’s and Gerald Croft’s selfish, vindictive, greedy and greater powers. She is fired by Mr. Birling for wanting a higher salary, fired again when she had thought herself happy and settled through Sheila’s jealous and selfish temperament, kept, though gratefully as a mistress by Gerald, made pregnant and even more wretched by Eric and finally pushed over the edge by Mrs. Birling’s refusal for the smallest pitiable amount of help she could have granted through her prejudice and scorn. Of course as Birling stated
“- If we were all responsible for everything that happened to everyone we’d has anything to do with, it would be very awkward”
For none of them actually made Eva Smith commit suicide did they? Surely they are not to blame for her death as how were they to know what the implications of their actions would create. This was the response of the two older Birling’s- at first complete denial of their involvement then when completely found out, denial that Eva’s death was their responsibility- though they were undoubtedly the start and end of the chain of events which were to lead to the tragedy. Their children and Gerald, however, do not need as great an interrogation as the elders to repent and declare their guilt- Sheila especially is immediately grief stricken and horrified that what she considered was only a meaningless affair- turned out so awful. She immediately takes responsibility of her actions.
“So I’m really responsible?” and later “-And I know I’m to blame- and I’m desperately sorry- but I cant believe- I wont believe – it’s simply my fault-”
She is acknowledging it but more to the point she wants to share the responsibility and not take all the blame. A sense of community is awakening in her. Eric her brother whose actions were even more destructive to Eva’s life is also as distraught and full of shame. In the text there is a slight amount of anger that he has been found out but it turns immediately to grief. Out of all those involved he had committed almost the worse crime. Yet he had tried to help her and even asked her to marry him as well as stealing money for her. So though he had acted wrongly and got Eva pregnant, he had tried to right it and had not run away from the problem. He also shows the most feeling for her death and when he learns of his mother’s refusal to help the girl, almost attacks her in his anger.
Eva Smith has her name and description of her brought to light throughout the performance but we as the audience never see her so have to create our own image of her. The name Eva immediately channels your mind to the story of Adam and Eve- the first people on earth in biblical history. Eve the first and only woman. In a way if you think of Eva as Eve, she represents the entire female sex. Smith on the other hand is a common name which would have been usual for the lower classes and gives us something to relate to. Eva Smith is the key of the play, the topic of conversation and the reason for the investigation. Most importantly, she is used to evoke emotion from the audience and characters. She binds everything and everyone together.
The Inspector in the play is an extremely debatable character as no-one apart from Priestly who wrote the play, are quite certain who he is meant to be. He is definitely the loudspeaker of Priestley’s views- in the way that throughout the play the Inspector always returns to his primary objectives of emphasising his ideas of community and that we are responsible for everyone not just ourselves.
“Public men Mr Birling have responsibilities as well as privileges.”
“You see we have to share something. If there’s nothing else we have to share our guilt.”
However the Inspector does not take himself out of the equation and speaks in plural- using our/we- he does not single out the Birlings by directly saying ‘you must’ or ‘you have’ but talks in consideration of everyone. This way he involves the audience and all around, impressing Priestley’s views.
When Priestley introduces the inspector we can see Priestley’s distaste towards this type of high-powered arrogance sterotypicalised in Mr. Birling. It is shown when the inspector is introduced and it comes strongly across in the inspector’s language and mannerism.
"You helped but didn't start it. (Rather savagely to Birling) You started it"
"(Cutting in with authority) He must wait his turn" Inspector
The Inspector throughout the play is the one with the power and force- though Birling tries to combat and override him again and again, each time is pushed contemptuously aside and ignored by the Inspector.
Priestley makes the inspector slowly and systematically destroy the arrogance, barriers and selfish ignorance which the Birling’s have built up to block themselves off from the world. He pulls apart each culprit bit by bit and without their fake guises, forces them to show everyone what they really are like and impresses onto them their responsibility to not only the death of Eva Smith but to everyone. By the time he leaves, drawing near the end of the play, the shell shocked Birling’s he leaves behind are almost unrecognizable from the characters that had begun the play. The most affected of all are without a doubt Shelia and Eric who without the need to cover themselves up with their social status and false appearances have morphed into much wiser people and have, by accepting full responsibility for their actions, been made purer and more likable.
On the other hand, however, Mr Birling and Mrs Birling still desperately try to salvage some of their dignity and home which has collapsed behind them with the Inspector’s departure. They do not seem to have learnt their lesson and continue to try to redeem their lives to the level it had been before the Inspectors arrival. Shelia’s and Eric’s readiness to learn from their experiences is in great contrast to their parents and Gerald’s who simply try to smooth over the incident. Gerald's attitudes towards community are difficult to decipher as throughout the play he constantly tries to become allied with Birling and be accepted into the family. This state of mind means that he appears to finally come out on the side of Birling and he does whatever he can to be supportive towards them. Privately one feels that Gerald feels the same as Eric and Sheila, but he cannot afford to agree with them if he wishes to get back in favour with their parents, as this is the only way that he can hope to re-start the engagement with Sheila- which he obviously wishes to rekindle as he once again offers her the ring at the end. This is shown in his systematic destruction of the Inspector's story, in which he is constantly prompting Birling to cast doubt on each part of the tale. Priestley’s message at the end of the play is simple but meaningful. Through Gerald’s investigation we discover that the ‘Inspector’ is not a real Police Inspector at all and is in fact a paradox. Throughout the performance the character of the Inspector tells us that it is wrong to live a lie, yet in the end he is nothing but one big lie himself. However this may have been yet another of the ‘Inspector’s’ tests upon the Birling’s- would they when they discovered the truth react any differently to how they had acted when he had been a real inspector in their minds? It is not who delivers the message that is important but the message itself. This is what Priestley tries to put across to us. Everybody has a huge responsibility to everyone- not just to them they love- but to all. We all have to help and aid others even when we think it is not up to us to do it. We can not ignore the misery or pain of others for if we do- who shall help us when we are in dire straights? We choose such a path and teach our children who carry the chain on, how can communities flourish and good deeds occur when we are all self centered and narrow minded? We have to work together and collaborate or else horrors like WW1 and 2 will simply keep repeating until we learn.
This is not just aimed at the 1945 audience who Priestley wrote the play for, but is relevant in today’s world and tomorrow’s world. Peace and harmony can only be achieved through understanding of each other. Disputes and wars and deaths today are all caused because of people’s greed or lusting for power, or simply because they do not understand each other and do not try to. If we do not learn this lesson now and try to right the wrong, we will be punished again and again- Titanic the greatest ship of her time was lost through our arrogance that we were the best and undefeatable- her loss, WW1 and WW2 were our punishments. Millions died and it was no ones fault but our own. The National Theatre production simply reminds us of this, which is a valuable reminder what with the war in Iraq and the tensions rising due to fighting and terrorism. Priestley shows us that however foolishly we act, however terribly, we will always get a second or even third chance but it is up to us whether we take them and learn- or don’t and suffer the consequences.
