The lack of compassion shown by the family varies, yet it is even more obvious to the audience who the kinder, more compassionate members of the family are. Sheila and Eric both admit the truth fully and accept that they have done something wrong, correcting themselves for the future. However this heavily contrasts against Mr Birling and Mrs Birling and their capitalist behaviour where refuse to be held responsible and do not appear to have learnt their lesson once the inspector leaves. Priestley tries to show that this behaviour is symbolic of the older generation, and how the younger generation “are more impressionable” than the older generation who do not try to change their attitudes/behaviour.
Priestley also hints on the possibility of exploitation in society when the inspector comments that “There are a lot of young women living in that sort of existence…” Here Priestley explains how women were needed for cheap labour as they were traditionally paid lower wages than men, and how without these women the economy would not be as successful. He also makes a sweeping statement about exploitation in capitalism when the inspector says that “There are a lot of young women…in every city and big town in this country…” who can relate to Eva’s experiences, which therefore shows just how uncaring and selfish society can be.
Another theme presented in the play ‘An Inspector Calls’ that is closely tied in with capitalism is that of social status and class. The English society in 1912 was split into classes mainly based on wealth, social rank, titles and connections. The Birlings can be seen as a family of higher class, with a noticeable amount of status and reputation in the society. However, these advantages are sometimes abused, which can result unfortunate circumstances for the person/people involved. An example of this is seen during Sheila’s confession.
Sheila’s involvement with Eva smith is slightly similar to that of her father. She ashamedly admits that she got Eva fired from her second and last form of employment, working at Milward’s, a shop that Sheila happened to be a regular and valued customer of. Sheila admits that she, overcome by jealousy at Eva’s youth and beauty made a complaint to the manager in regard to Eva’s so called impertinence. “And so you used the power you had, as the daughter of a good customer and also of a man well known in town to punish the girl…” says the inspector in the end.
Also, not only is Sheila guilty of such an offence, but Mrs Birling is also at fault as she abused her status as the head of the Brumley Women’s Charity organization to influence the decision of refusing help to Eva. Here Priestley is plainly criticising how rich people with social status and importance such as Sheila and her mother can manipulate their status and money to take advantage of other unfortunate, lower-classed people considered of less importance and ruin their lives with their irresponsible actions.
Also, people with money and status can abuse their position by trying to intimidate others. An example of such a person in the play is Mr Birling. Mr Birling’s abrupt and posh attitude suggests that he believes himself to be of importance, and above the law. He continually tries to show that he will not be intimidated by the inspector by flaunting the fact that he has power, and connections; “Perhaps I should warn you that he’s(the Chief Constable) an old friend of mine, and I see him quite frequently……this is Mr Gerald Croft, son of Sir George Croft- you know, Crofts Limited.” Priestley uses these examples to try and criticize the way in which upper-classed people and capitalists tried to oppress other people by utilising their title and status.
Differences in social class also brought different attitudes and stereotypes of people of in certain classes. For example, the attitudes that some capitalists and some people of higher social status had towards those in lower social classes. Eva was a girl of lower social class, with little money or status to her name. People, particularly girls of such background were commonly expected to resort to prostitution or cause trouble as Mr Birling clearly suggests: “Have you any idea what happened to her after that? Get into trouble? Go on the streets?” He continues to assume that she gets into trouble after every job she gets. Here Priestley is showing the disrespectful and discriminatory views most people had of the lower classes, especially attitudes to working class women and their roles-particularly on the part of men.
Mrs Birling also conveys a prejudiced and discriminatory attitude towards Eva when she comes to the Brumley Women’s Charity Organization for help. Mrs Birling angrily retorts that Eva claimed “…elaborate fine airs and scruples that were simply absurd in a girl of her position.” The inspector sees the irony in this; the meaning is similar to what Mr Birling suggested about Eva becoming a prostitute. By saying this, Mrs Birling creates a barrier between Eva, a girl of low social background and herself, a woman of high social status, and cannot accept the fact that working class people can be moral as well-Eva refused to accept stolen money from Eric-and can have rights equal to those of higher-classed people. Ironically, it is upper-classed people who are immoral; Eric is an example of this as he is a heavy drinker, and stole money from his father’s office.
Stereotypically, people of high-class and status are often seen to be respectable and highly honourable people, whereas on the contrary, people of lower-class and status are generally seen as disreputable, dishonest etc.
Ironically in this play, Priestley has portrayed this to be the other way round where people of high social status can be corrupt and immoral, whereas people of lower social status are honest and moral.
Several examples of this are given throughout the novel where particularly men of high social status resort to drinking and prostitutes to try to overcome their problems. This suggests that they are improper and disreputable, and that even with all the amount of wealth and status they have, they’re lives are still not all that good as would normally be expected to be. Priestley emphasizes that these factors combined make men of high social status susceptible to doing bad things, for example, in the case of Eva Smith. Such behaviour might be expected of people with lower-social status or of working class who have more of a reason to drink to overcome the real problems they face, however this is not the case as we see with Eva.
Throughout the play, Priestley mainly tries to emphasize on the fact that English society in general is not as civilised and just as we might think. Society describes people living together in a community; people who help each other out when in need and are not prejudiced or disrespectful to one another. On the other hand, the type of society described by Priestley seems to be the total opposite of this. People are more judgemental and accept no responsibilities for the welfare of others, which leads to terrible consequences- as in the case of this play, the death of a young woman.
Before the arrival of the inspector, Mr Birling relates his attitudes to community to the younger generation of the family saying that “You’d think everybody has to look after everybody else, as if we are all mixed up together like bees in a hive-community and all that nonsense.” He continues on stating that ”A man has to mind his own business and look after himself and his own…” of which at this point there is a sharp ring at the door indicating the arrival of the inspector. This impeccable timing seems coincidental, yet has been made deliberately by Priestley to draw the audiences’ attention to what Mr Birling had actually said, and to further allow that moment of importance to be linked in with the rest of the play.
However, just as Mr Birling begins the play with one attitude, the Inspector leaves it contradicting that attitude. This is dramatic irony used especially by Priestley to draw the audiences’ attention to this significant point. When the inspector has finished all his inquiries, he gives a long, powerful speech about responsibilities for others and the “…millions and millions of Eva Smiths and John Smiths still left with us, their lives, their hopes and fears, their suffering and chance of happiness all intertwined with our lives…” With this the inspector emphasizes on the fact that society should make allowances for poor people and those who suffer, and that we should be careful of our actions as we are directly responsible for the consequences.
In conclusion, Priestley is criticising the way that capitalism and social class and status have a negative effect on the English society in general in 1912. He emphasizes on how these factors influenced cruelty and selfishness in society, leading to damaging inflictions on the unfortunate people involved, such as Eva Smith.
