“Yes, yes. Horrid business, but I don’t understand why you should come here,”
This completely typifies Birling’s whole attitude that people should look out for themselves only, showing in the process, that compared to Eric – his son, he is a very callous man and that he will continue to follow his personal philosophy on life of self-centredness and arrogance.
As the play progresses, the Inspector gets down to what he has paid the family a visit for. He shows Birling a photograph of this girl, Eva Smith, but interestingly, he does not let the others see it. At first, the audience regard this as nothing more than just curious, but later on, we soon realise the significance of it.
After witnessing the photograph and explaining his past encounters with Eva Smith, his own philosophy comes back to haunt him:
“Because what happened to her then may have determined what happened to her afterwards, and what happened to her afterwards may have driven her to suicide. A chain of events.”
This particular comment shows the theme of the whole play; that everything you do has an effect on someone else and so on and will eventually come back to you. Basically, the Inspector is trying to point out to Birling that everything we do has a consequence on someone else, which is exactly what has happened with this young girl.
Although we never see Eva Smith on stage, a clear picture is built up in the audience’s mind. She was very attractive, a good worker, lively. The list is endless. Only positive things are heard about Eva so generally speaking, she was a very nice young girl with a lot going for her at the time. As the play goes on, we find out more and more about her until eventually, the audience feel sympathetic towards her, realising that there is a growing difference between the characters as the Inspector exposes a rift between certain characters, especially Eric and his father:
“It isn’t if you can’t go and work somewhere else.”
This is the first sign of a rift between Eric and his father because Eric maybe does not agree with the self-centred attitude that not only his father, but also Gerald possess. The Inspector has caused a gulf to form between the two and as times passes, this gulf will widen and widen until they are completely separate for all to see. This difference in opinion continues only minutes later:
“I call it tough luck.”
This is now a clear indication that Eric is moving away from his father’s intransigent attitudes towards his employees and things will begin to differ between the two even more and more. The significance of this is that if it had not been for the Inspector’s visit, this conversation would have never happened between Birling and Eric. It is one of the many direct effects that the Inspector has upon the family.
In-between Eric and Birling’s little arguments and disagreements, the Inspector continues to interrogate the family one by one, backing them into a corner at the same time:
“It’s about time you learnt to face a few responsibilities.”
This remark made by Birling epitomizes his whole persona. Once again he has made a comment without thinking and that will end up being heavily tinged with irony, as this one is. For the remainder of the play, all the Birlings will have to face up to their responsibilities and admit that in their own ways, they are all in the wrong.
When Sheila becomes more involved once again in the story, she hears about the tragedy:
“Oh – how horrible!”
Sheila echoes her brother’s horrified response to this terrible news even though – just as Eric did not – she did not know the girl, Eva Smith. It is becoming increasingly obvious on stage that there are many differences in opinion amongst the family that probably would not have been recognised if it had not been for the Inspector. This is once again stressing the Inspector’s metaphorical stature and presence amongst the family. Not only does he probe them, he also exposes how they really are to each other and also the audience, because during their time on stage with the Inspector, each character has changed in our view.
The interesting thing about “An Inspector Calls” is that throughout the entire play, the set does not change and there is no extended passage of time. Priestley purposely uses this technique because he wishes to keep the audience’s attention using other methods:
“Are you sure you don’t know.”
On stage, this would have effective dramatic implications because the audience suddenly realise that there is a twist in the story and that it is not only Birling involved in Eva’s death. We are intrigued by this and eager to find out more about Gerald’s involvement. This is only one of the techniques Priestley uses to increase dramatic tension.
There is not only a growing difference seen between Eric and his father, but also Sheila and her father. It appears that they have quite contrasting views regarding the news they have all received:
“But these girls aren’t cheap labour – they’re people.”
This short phrase puts emphasis on Sheila’s sorrow felt for Eva Smith even though she does not know her. It also contrasts with her father’s opinion that Eva’s death is nothing to do with him. At least Sheila expresses some form of sadness and sympathy towards her and other such working girls in her situation. It could be said that Sheila stands out as the voice of conscience for the whole family because she is by far the strongest person in terms of character. It is not only Sheila who feels a degree of sympathy towards Eva, but also the Inspector. In all honesty though, it is not his place to feel upset about this whole tragic situation, yet he does, probably because most of the family seem uninterested and unwilling to take any blame. This could also be the reason he heavily interrogates them later on in the play. All the Inspector wishes to do, is make the family realise that what they did - no matter how insignificant it seemed at the time – obviously had drastic consequences in the long-run.
In the opening, Arthur Birling was portrayed as having very strong views about the current state in Britain and many would say he acted as Priestley’s spokesman, but it soon becomes evident that in-fact, he was a spokesman for most Britons at the time with his arrogant, complacent attitude. However, it is now looking as if the Inspector is playing the spokesman for Priestley:
“There are a lot of young women living that sort of existence in every city and big town in this country.”
This shows the audience that Priestley himself was a very opinionated person when it came to the subject of employees and how they treated their workers. He had a social conscience and felt that he could put his views across in the form of a character in his play which turned out to work with extreme effect because of the play’s popularity.
Priestley, in the Inspector’s role, begins to show how Eva was. We already know she was an attractive young girl, but now we also find out that she had had a bad life right up until she died:
“no work, no money coming in, and living in lodgings, with no relatives to help her, few friends, lonely, half-starved.”
Besides this, we also find out that both her parents were dead. So all in all, Eva’s life is full of misfortunes. At the moment, we know mainly the sad times Eva endured and this evokes the audience’s sympathy and causes them to form a hatred for this family they are seeing upon stage. Luckily though, Eva does encounter good times, but it is like a cycle; happiness, inevitably followed by sadness.
Obviously, the audience begin to detest the whole Birling family, so Priestley must satisfy them:
“We were having a nice little family celebration tonight. And a nasty mess you’ve made of it now, haven’t you?”
Because Priestley knows the audience will feel sympathetic towards Eva and loathing for the family, he gives the Inspector a peculiar habit of turning the family’s words against them. He uses the words, ‘nasty mess’ in a different context just to please the audience. It is an effective technique used by Priestley as he gives these simple words a whole new meaning. He distorts them, but for the good.
When Sheila explains her role in this innocent girl’s death, more unpleasantness is exposed, as with Birling. The audience realise that it was because of Sheila that Eva was sacked from her job at Milwards. This is rather similar to Alderman Meggarty. He is a respectable figure in the community, but little do people know, that he is an attempted rapist. Fellow people in their community would never imagine that such a wealthy, high-class family could be involved in such a scandal, but to the audience who have seen how the Inspector has exposed them, it is no wonder that Sheila reacted in such a manner as this.
As before, Priestley uses dramatic moments to keep the audience’s attention:
“What?”
Because Gerald instantly recognises this name, a moment of tension is created upon stage because he has let slip about his involvement in Eva’s death, although he only does this, because he hears the name, ‘Daisy Renton’. Not only his reaction, but also the expression he uses, conveys his sudden shock, meaning he uncontrollably admits to being involved. He will later confess all to the Inspector, but more importantly, to his fiancée, Sheila. The Inspector’s role is fully exploited here because if it was not for him, Gerald would not be in the situation where he must explain his time spent with Daisy Renton.
Act One ends with Sheila and Gerald arguing and we the audience recognizing for the first time that Sheila has already developed a deep understanding of the Inspector and how he goes about his duty:
“Why – you fool – he knows.”
Sheila’s appreciation for the Inspector’s effect on the whole family indicates that she is the deepest thinker of them all. She has understood the Inspector’s ways and means of finding out what he wants, when he wants. With this though, she has also become conscious that he does not need to interrogate them, like she said, he already knows each and every one’s involvement.
As the curtain opens at the beginning of Act Two, the audience see that the set has not changed at all and there has been no passage of time. With this technique, Priestley has followed the Three Unities of classical drama to successfully create an intense, claustrophobic atmosphere both upon stage and within the audience. The claustrophobia that would be felt reinforces the Inspector’s role of very dominant presence. The Three Unities also increase the Inspector’s impact. This is another of the methods used to keep the audience’s interest because Priestley would have known at the time that there would be a single, dramatic focus for the audience.
Once Act Two has begun, we begin to see just how much of an effect the Inspector has had on Sheila in-particular:
“No Mother – please!”
With these words, it has come to the attention of everyone both on stage and in the audience, that Sheila has developed sensitivity due to the Inspector’s visit. Not only that, but she has more importantly developed as a person. That is why she immediately spots the condescension in her Mother’s voice.
Later in Act Two, the Inspector’s influence is fully realised:
“This isn’t the time to pretend that Eric isn’t used to drink.”
The fact that Sheila suddenly reveals to her family about her brother’s heavy drinking confirms our suspicions that Sheila has been conditioned most by the Inspector’s visit. She can feel his power and presence and in the process, we can begin to see the truth beneath the veneer of respectability. There is an unpleasant reality that everyone must face up to and take full responsibility for.
The Inspector’s presence is possibly most seen in his dealings with Gerald. Someone of his social status could easily refuse to speak to the Inspector, but he feels as if he has to:
“(TO GERALD) Go on.”
It is obvious that the Inspector is more domineering than first thought. It is because of the Inspector that Gerald confesses to being involved with Daisy Renton. Under normal circumstances though, he would never reveal that. He would simply lie and make up another story, as he did at the time to Sheila. All of this portrays just how much of a presence the Inspector really is both on stage and throughout the audience.
Each and every character has had some involvement with either Eva Smith or Daisy Renton, but only Gerald ever really cared for her:
“I made the people at the County find some food for her.”
This is only one of the things Gerald did to help Daisy. He also gave her somewhere to live and money and most importantly of all, he gave her love. There are parts in the play where Gerald shows signs of moving away from the stereotypically arrogant attitudes of the time and this is all due to the Inspector, but once he has gone, he will soon revert back to his old ways.
When we hear about Alderman Meggarty, it is no surprise, but Mrs. Birling, is extremely shocked:
“There’s no need to be disgusting. And surely you don’t mean Alderman Meggarty?”
This realisation about Alderman Meggarty epitomizes the whole play. On the surface he is a respectable character, just like the Birlings, but underneath he is an attempted rapist. Priestley is saying that no-matter how high a class you are, it does not mean you are a good person, unlike Eva Smith or Daisy Renton. Neither of them had any money or anything going for them, but still they kept their standards and tried their best with life.
The Inspector’s influence is continuously felt upon stage and within the characters, but only one of them appreciates his presence:
“I know. Somehow he makes you.”
It is Sheila who can sense that the Inspector is manipulating them all. He does not have to use his status as an Inspector or even his height to cause an oppressive atmosphere in the house. He has a simple hypnotic control over them all that is working to great effect. Another of his techniques is his persistent questioning and interrogation of the family. During which, he forces them to say things they will soon regret. For the audience, this would be very pleasing to watch because so far in the play, the opinion they have built up of the family, is one of hate and at the same time, pity towards Eva and Daisy.
As the play continues, Gerald is completely honest about his feelings, not only to the Inspector, but also to Sheila. He tells her the full story of how he met this young girl and then continued seeing her. His complete confession is due only to the Inspector’s influence. At the time Gerald had lied about where he had been, but now he obviously feels as if he must reveal all. At the moment, Gerald is showing signs of developing into a better person, but once the Inspector has left, he will revert back to his old ways.
Gerald’s account of his time spent with Daisy Renton shows us that she is very sensitive. She did not make any demands of Gerald and was more than happy with the food and money he gave her. Neither did she take advantage of the fact that he is the son of Lord Croft who is also a very wealthy, respectable figure in the community. It would have been so easy for her to start making demands and threats that she would tell everyone about his involvement with her, but she did not. She fully appreciated Gerald’s love and affection, even if it was only for a short time.
At the beginning of the play, the whole family could not have been any happier. They were all enjoying dinner, celebrating Sheila and Gerald’s engagement. At this point, they could never have imagined that it could go wrong or anything could happen that could dampen their spirits. Sheila had claimed that she would never let her ring out of her sight, but only half an hour later on stage, the mood could not have changed any more:
“You and I aren’t the same people who sat down to dinner here.”
Sheila has begun to recognise that there is a difference between herself and Gerald and she is right; they have both changed dramatically and learnt a lot about one another. The only reason for them finding this out about each other is the Inspector. He has exposed to them their darker sides, not only to others, but also to themselves. Both Sheila and Gerald have learnt that they are not who they thought they were. Sheila never imagined that Gerald would ever lie to her, never mind continue a relationship with another woman. However, she does respect him for his honesty. Because of all of this, Sheila has done the exact opposite of what she said earlier in the play. This is all reinforcing the Inspector’s presence within the house, to the audience. For them, it would be fascinating to watch the Birlings slowly crumble under the pressure of the Inspector’s metaphorical force. Sheila’s astute comment does not only signal that they have both changed, but also that she has an immense respect for the Inspector.
Throughout the play, there is a sequence of events concerning each and every character’s involvement in Eva’s death. So far, Priestley has stuck to this specific sequence, but all of a sudden, it changes. The final thing that drove Eva to suicide was the fact that she was refused charity. This happened after she became pregnant, but the Inspector deals with Mrs. Birling before Eric. The whole purpose of this, is to cause a more dramatic climax to the end of Act Two. The way the Inspector suddenly follows up Mrs. Birling, is by showing her the photograph:
“No. why should I?”
At first, Mrs. Birling claims she does not recognise the girl in the photograph and to the audience, she is very convincing. She says it coolly and calmly, but it does not fool the Inspector. This is probably why his interrogation of her is more intense and relentless than it was with the other characters, such as Gerald. He had the decency to confess and tell the whole story straight away and that made matters much easier and better to deal with, but Mrs. Birling refuses point blank to accept any involvement with the girl in the picture.
As the Inspector proceeds to scrutinize and examine Mrs. Birling, her attitudes and opinions are quite obviously as bad, if not worse than those of her husband:
“one of the things that prejudiced me against her case.”
Mrs. Birling says she was prejudiced against Daisy’s case. This shows the audience and probably most of the family, what sort of a person Mrs. Birling is. She has a completely callous disregard for other people’s feelings and is only concerned about herself. It is also ironic that Mrs. Birling works for a charity, yet she is the most uncharitable character in the play. It appears that she took great satisfaction in refusing Daisy Renton help. Priestley knew that this would anger the audience, which is also another reason the Inspector is so heavy on Mrs. Birling. When hearing this, the only family member who completely disagrees with what Mrs. Birling has done, is Sheila. This is once again showing how much she has changed and developed as a person due to the Inspector’s visit. It could also be said that Gerald has changed too, but he will soon return back to his old ways. Whilst the play has been going on, it has become increasingly clear that Mrs. Birling is the most arrogant character. She is the type of person who causes social snobbery to occur, but at this precise moment, we see her at the height of her heartlessness, yet she genuinely believes she did the right thing in refusing a penniless, pregnant young girl any charity. The Inspector made all of the characters regret what they had done, but Mrs. Birling is firm and steel-like with her actions and attitude.
The audience thought that this was the climax of Act Two, but soon it becomes clear that the ultimate climax is when Eric becomes involved in this ongoing saga. The way he drags Eric into the story, would also please the audience greatly:
“Go and look for the father of the child. It’s his responsibility.”
In these words, Mrs. Birling is condemning her son and in the process, bringing it to the audience’s attention that the one and only character not yet involved, is Eric. This is the pinnacle of the act and keeps us captivated for the following scene. Once again Priestley has sprung a twist upon us and his timing could not have been better. Just as Mrs. Birling’s involvement is beginning to die down, another surprise is told.
The Inspector continues to question Mrs. Birling. He is demanding honest and truthful answers, but also he is driving her towards even more conviction of her son. It is once again a skilful technique used by Priestley because he knows the audience do not like the Birling family and they would love to see them suffer for what they have done, preferably experiencing humiliation along the way. As this is happening, he is also building up a much clearer picture of Eva Smith/Daisy Renton than we had before:
“she didn’t want to take stolen money?”
This is just another instance of her decency. Although she had nothing at all in the world, she still kept her principles and her standards in refusing to accept stolen money. Just as she did with Gerald, she made no demands what so ever of Eric. She could have so easily forced him into marrying her, simply because he had made her pregnant, but as we later find out, there was no love between the two, so she did not. She could not.
After continuous questioning, Sheila is the first character to realise what the Inspector is implying:
“Mother – stop – stop!”
The fact that Sheila realises first that it is Eric who the Inspector is trying to say is the father, reinforces to the audience that she has been most heavily conditioned by the Inspector and she has developed as a person. At the moment, the atmosphere on stage could not be more different from that of the opening. At first they were all happy and smiling, but now, for no other reason than the Inspector’s visit, their happiness has been punctured, leaving the family in disarray and not knowing what to do next.
Act Two has been full of action and happenings involving many of the characters and this intense atmosphere is continued right until the end:
“INSPECTOR holds up his hand.”
As a stage direction, this is not so effective, but when seen on stage, it would have huge significance. It is signalling just how important a character the Inspector has been. He has changed almost every aspect of how the Birlings live and their whole outlook on life. Not only does this have an effect on the audience because as soon as it happens, everything on stage stops, it also has a mesmeric effect on the characters. The act has ended on a moment of high drama with the realisation that Eric is the father of Daisy Renton’s unborn baby.
As with before, Act Three, begins exactly as Act Two ended. This gives everything a sense of continuity, a mood of sustained tension, and the audience’s attention is still totally focused on the stage. The only difference now on stage, is that the earlier veneer of respectability is gone and all the characters have been exposed to each other, all because of the Inspector.
Although at the moment it does not seem obvious, the Inspector is hoping in his duties, to change the family. Luckily it has worked with Sheila and Gerald to a certain extent. Mr. Birling and Mrs. Birling especially though, are not very impressionable, but the most important character who needs to change, is Eric:
“I was in that state when a chap easily turns nasty – and I threatened to make a row.”
The point of this is that Eric could very easily become the next Alderman Meggarty. He comes from a wealthy family, who are all well respected, but he has a hidden side; all it takes is a few drinks and he stoops to the level of a rapist. The fact that at first, Daisy refused him entry to her flat, but then had to give in, could be interpreted as rape when they finally had sex and she became pregnant. For now though, Eric could be represented as an embryonic Alderman Meggarty who will eventually become as well known for his womanizing as Alderman Meggarty, but that is why the Inspector is here. From his visit he is hoping to influence Eric for the best and leave a lasting impression on him, ensuring he will never do such a thing again. Eric however, does show signs of genuine remorse for what he has done, meaning that the Inspector has now changed both Sheila and Eric. Thankfully, they have not taken the same arrogant views as their parents that they are better than everyone else.
Although each and every character was somehow involved in the death of this young girl, only one committed a crime. Eric. Eric could be arrested for embezzlement. At first, this comes as a shock to the audience, but soon they realise the purpose of Priestley only making one crime; he is questioning them; who is most guilty? This question that has been placed in the audience’s minds makes us explore the idea of wrong-doing. Eric did commit a crime, but he was trying to help Daisy Renton. It can be argued that Mrs. Birling has committed the worst offence by refusing her charity, but refusing someone charity, is completely legal. Even by the end of the play, it is still difficult for the audience to answer this question, but what it does do, is cause the audience to go away from the theatre, and reflect upon the nature of wrong-doing.
Both Sheila and Eric have felt the influence of the Inspector already and both show signs of regret for their actions, but Birling is quite different:
“You must give me a list of those accounts. I’ve got to cover this up as soon as I can.”
Birling obviously is not angry that his son has got a girl pregnant; he is more concerned with the fact that he stole money, proving that he is more interested in material wealth than the well-being of a young girl carrying his unborn grandchild. His priorities are all wrong and unfortunately, there is nothing the Inspector will be able to do. As before, Mr and Mrs. Birling are far less impressionable than their children. They have no respect for the Inspector at all.
The early rift that had appeared between Birling and Eric has reopened:
“Because you’re not the kind of father a chap could go to when he’s in trouble – that’s why.”
Here we see the Inspector’s effect in full flow. He has caused an argument between two people that under normal circumstances, would never have taken place. At the moment, it seems to be a bad thing for all involved, but over time, the Birlings will look back at this and see that the Inspector could sense a crack in their relationship. All he had to do was say the rights things and it would open fully. The argument also shows the audience how the family really are. There are no pretences, no veneer of respectability. We simply see the raw Birling and Eric at their very worst. The only reason for this occurrence is the Inspector. In the past few minutes in stage, Eric has revealed all; he cannot confide in his father and he feels murderous towards his mother for finally killing Eva Smith/Daisy Renton off. This is a far cry from the mood they were all in right back at the beginning of the play.
In the Inspector’s closing speech, he sums up the night’s events as if he were the judge:
“each of you helped to kill her. Remember that.”
Whilst being portrayed as a judge, he also piles on the guilt. It is important that their remorse is to be based on guilt and a full realisation of how all of their actions eventually brought about the death of an innocent young girl carrying another life, even more innocent. Besides his role as judge, the Inspector also assumes other roles and has done throughout the whole play. Firstly, he has acted as counsel for defence, ensuring that the family pay for their actions with guilt. It has been his job right from the beginning, to make sure that each and every person realises their involvement on their own. In places, some persuasion was needed, but eventually, all characters collapsed under the mammoth pressure he was piling upon them. Many would also argue that we the audience act as the jury. It is our job as individuals to decide whether or not the family – as a whole – are guilty for Eva Smith/Daisy Renton’s death. In my opinion, they are fully responsible. They should have borne in mind at the time, that all of their actions will eventually end up harming someone, even if it turned out not to be Eva or Daisy, as the case may be.
Another aspect of the Inspector’s final speech is the feeling of irony:
“millions and millions and millions of Eva Smiths and John Smiths”
This short sentence is a direct contradiction of Birling’s right at the beginning when he told Eric and Gerald they should only look out for themselves. Hopefully now, the Inspector has made him realise that if everyone was as self-centred and ignorant of other people, then there would be far more cases similar to this. Another of the Inspector’s comments would today, go unappreciated:
“fire and blood and anguish.”
The reason for Priestley choosing these specific words was because at the time the play was first performed at the end of World War II, the audience would fully appreciate the pain in these words. They have lived through the war and learnt that people need to look out for one another or death is imminent. All of those words represent the pain, distress and grief endured during World War II. Priestley is once again putting his message across with great effect.
With the structure of the play, Priestley has gone against the traditional detective genre and created his own style. In a traditional detective story, it begins with a group of suspects until they are whittled down to just the one, but in, “An Inspector Calls” , it begins with only one suspect in Mr. Birling and ends with five suspects including the whole family. The Inspector does this by exposing all of their guilt and gradually drawing them all into the spotlight.