How does J.B.Priestley interest the audience in the contrast between the ideas and beliefs of Authur Birling and Inspector Goole, in 'An Inspector Calls'?

How does J.B.Priestley interest the audience in the contrast between the ideas and beliefs of Authur Birling and Inspector Goole, in ‘An Inspector Calls’?

In this essay I hope to identify and discuss J.B.Priestley’s use of genre, tension, characterisation, irony and any other factors that contribute to making this play a success. A successful play is one that keeps the audience’s interest throughout, and this is one such play. The two main characters in question are Authur Birling and Inspector Goole. They are very contrasting characters in almost every way. Apart from discussing these differences, it will also be interesting to see how Priestley keeps to the detective thriller genre, while conveying a moral lesson, and also not focusing too much on Birling and the Inspector’s views on social and moral issues of the period. I will also use key aspects of the play like the speeches made by both Birling and the Inspector. The conclusion I hope to make will be on the basic ways in which Priestley engineered this specific play to suit the needs of the audience and engage them in the play he wanted them to see.

J.B.Priestley’s play on the moral issues of the 1940’s can relate to any era. ‘An Inspector Calls’ is a play in the guise of a detective thriller genre (although no imprisonable offence has been committed). Priestley had to disguise his play because at the time (1947, just after the end of the war), the most popular types of play were those written by famous crime and detective thriller authors, such as Agatha Christie and Emlyn Williams. His play, similar to the original morality plays of the late middle ages, but written in a more modern, secular manner, wasn’t the type of play that was attracting the masses. To gain the audience he needed to make ‘An Inspector Calls’ a success it assumed the disguise of a detective thriller.

Priestley was very interested in exploring time. This is shown in ‘An Inspector Calls’ as the play was written in 1947 but is set in 1912. Priestley is able to use hindsight to make comments on events with dramatic irony. Birling makes his ironic speeches about the good times ahead, the ‘unsinkable Titanic’, and ‘prosperity that will make war impossible’, to characters that are unaware of future events and the lessons they will be forced to learn in ‘fire, blood, and anguish’. For the audience the Inspector’s view of the world is an alternative to that presented by Birling. Priestley’s influences for the manipulation of time are two theories: Ouspensky’s ‘A New Model of the Universe’, and Dunne’s idea that individuals could look forward aswell as backwards in time. Dunne’s idea is used most prominently with the Inspector, as he has seemed to look forward in time to see Eva Smith’s suicide.

The play is set in 1912, before the Titanic sets sail and before there is any substantial talk of war. The setting and style of the surroundings and costume is Edwardian. Just as the style, the characters are stereotypical but this is so that the audience can understand what the characters’ intentions are and makes it easier to follow the play. The play itself is very compact and has no sub-plot to distract the audiences’ attention from the central theme. The actual play takes place in one room, the dining room. This simplifies the play substantially and allows Priestley to focus on other aspects of the plot. The action in the one location is continuous but also acts as an engine for the changing of the main character.

Act one begins by introducing all the characters especially the family. It introduces the idea of a happy family celebration with a degree of optimism. The pompous Mr. Birling dominates this gathering that is soon to be interrupted by a man who will unearth events that reveal some of the worst aspects of the family’s characters. Sheila is engaged to Gerald and Mr. Birling is expecting a knighthood to raise his status in society. In act one there are many points of dramatic irony in Birling’s speeches, but nothing to warn us of the shocking arrival of the Inspector. Events soon gather speed and the tension rises as we learn of family involvement with Eva Smith, and the scandal of Gerald’s affair. Sheila begins to realise that in some way ‘he is giving us rope – so that we’ll hang ourselves’. The play is made even more exciting as the audience realise that each character is implicated, and that the scale of each one’s responsibility is greater than that of the last. Mrs. Birling attempts to shift the blame of the girl’s suicide onto the father of the unborn child. She unwittingly accuses Eric who is out of the room. The only people in the room that know the truth about Eric are Sheila and the Inspector. Eric’s guilt is used to explore the hypocrisy of the Birling parents. The suspense is not over when the Inspector leaves, as two more twists in the plot take place and broaden the scope of the issues raised during the investigation. The Inspector’s identity is questioned and even the existence of one Eva Smith, as Gerald puts forward the idea that since no two people saw the photograph of the girl at the same time, perhaps there were several girls. The tension between the family increases as the moral divide is shown between the young and the older generations. The final moment is a shocking twist in the play after it has been decided that the whole ordeal was a hoax. A phone call from the infirmary confirming that a young girl had just died from poisoning and an Inspector will be calling to ask some questions. Shock and surprise techniques ensure that the audience will leave the auditorium in a real state of shock and have hopefully found the play entertaining, interesting, and thought provoking.

Mr. Birling is a main character at the beginning of the play and has his moments where he interrupts proceedings throughout. Much description has been put into the main characters and to create the perfect impression of Mr. Birling he must be, ‘A heavy-looking, rather portentous man in his middle fifties with fairly easy manners but rather provincial in his speech.’

Birling is in the pipeline for a knighthood and has been mayor and a magistrate in the past. As a result he has a high opinion of his own ideas and beliefs. At the beginning of the ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Birling is in the pipeline for a knighthood and has been mayor and a magistrate in the past. As a result he has a high opinion of his own ideas and beliefs. At the beginning of the play Birling is in control of his situation as the head of the family. But as soon as the Inspector arrives then his leadership is compromised and that is not something that Birling likes. In some places Birling tries to take back his authority by trying to lead the Inspector into agreeing with him, ‘it would be wouldn’t it? – We would all, wouldn’t we?’ The Inspector as a result asks even more questions to prompt Birling that gives the impression that he knows already and simply needs confirmation.

Mr. Birling’s speeches at the beginning of the play in act one are very bombastic and are filled with dramatic irony – ‘The Titanic, unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable’ – ‘Silly little war scares’. He is over and unrealistically optimistic about the future and prosperity of the world, ‘There’ll be peace and prosperity and rapid progress everywhere’. Priestley emphasises how out of touch Birling is by adding, ‘Russia will always be behind naturally’. Birling really knows nothing of world politics and the irony is that the Titanic sinks and very soon Russia will show it’s true political strength in 1914 when Britain is plunged into World War One. Yet, Mr. Birling believes himself to be ‘a hard-headed, practical man of business’. As a businessman Mr. Birling is naïve to be confident of the future, but in his defence, there was a lot going on in the world that may create an impression of prosperity. What Priestley is trying to illustrate in these powerfully ironic speeches is his hatred for the businessman who is only interested in himself and making money. He doesn’t like the idea of everyone helping each other ‘Community and all that nonsense’. Birling’s feelings are summed up in the last sentence of his speech before the Inspector arrives, ‘A man has to mind his own business and look after himself and his own’.

The Inspector’s purpose is to turn the family’s ideas about life community and ‘a man has to look after him-self and his own’, upside down. Inspector Goole is a characternym as it suggests a ghoul or ghost, but that link is not made until later on in the play. The Inspector’s description – ‘He need not be a big man, but he creates at once an impression of massiveness, solidity and purposefulness. He is a man in his fifties, dressed in a plain darkish suit of the period. He speaks carefully, weightily and has a disconcerting habit of looking hard at the person he addresses before actually speaking’. The Inspector’s mannerisms including the way he speaks are different to Birling’s to create the most impression on the family and audience. The unfamiliar could also prove intimidating for Birling, and coupled with the solidarity and purposefulness of the Inspector’s persona it is not surprising that he manages to take control of the situation from the beginning.

The Inspector interrupts the happy occasion at the Birling’s house to bring news of a young girl’s suicide. He carries out one line of inquiry at a time just like in a real investigation and although he is rude and somewhat impertinent towards the family, there is no reason at this point to doubt his role as a real inspector. Inspector Goole controls the play from the moment he tells the shocking news of Eva Smith’s death, ‘Two hours ago a young woman died in the Infirmary. She’d been taken there this afternoon because she had swallowed a lot of strong disinfectant’. He uses simple to the point language and stays relatively quiet, thus making an impact when he does raise his voice, and takes authority ‘Stop’, and ‘Your daughter isn’t living on the moon’. Birling is annoyed by the Inspector’s ability to control the situation and does not like his actions being questioned as they are when concerning Eva Smith’s dismissal. The Inspector simply asks why he wouldn’t give her a rise in pay – ‘Why?’ ‘Did you say why?’ Birling also becomes agitated at the involvement of his family and in the middle of act one he says angrily ‘We were having a nice little family celebration tonight. And a nasty mess you’ve made of it now, haven’t you?’ the Inspector replies ‘That’s more or less what I was thinking earlier tonight, when I was in the Infirmary looking at what was left of Eva Smith. A nice little promising life there, I thought, and a nasty little mess somebody’s made of it’. The Inspector repeats words or phrases that Birling has used to increase the power of his own words, example of which can be seen in the above quote.

The Inspector is harsh on the family and especially Mr. Birling in many places, probably out of sheer frustration, because despite these clear messages being thrown at him, Mr. Birling doesn’t show any sign of remorse or change in his attitude. Mr. Birling simply wishes to pass the blame and is most worried about his social status. It is difficult to feel sorry for Mr. Birling because it is his own fault that he his too pompous to change. Even when words like the Inspector’s ‘Public men, Mr. Birling have responsibilities aswell as privileges’, are thrown at him. At the end of the play when the hard hitting news from the Infirmary that a girl really has died shows on his face as vulnerability, shock, disbelief and confusion, then you may feel sorry for a man who is out of his depth. This part of the play is very well written because the main body of the play is a build up of tension and a slow revealing of the facts of Eva Smith’s life and death. Then the strength of the play peaks at the Inspector’s speech to the family,

‘But just remember this. One Eva Smith has 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, all intertwined with our lives, and what we think and say and do.’ The Inspectors words are harsh, final, and totally contradict the most important speeches that Birling made earlier in the play. ‘We don’t live alone. We are members of one body.’ Directly connected with the word community, therefore another contradiction to Birling’s attacks on such things. ‘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.’ Here is something for the audience to relate to and the part of the speech that sounds the most unavoidable in life and learning. Hopefully this real sense of pain and suffering is meant to shock the characters and the audience into rethinking their own values and beliefs. ‘Good night.’ A polite and almost mocking final word to the family. Because of the Inspector’s discoveries, they cannot possibly have a ‘good’ night, but one that they will remember as probably one of the worst nights in their lives.

Priestley was very interested in exploring time. This is shown in ‘An Inspector Calls’ as the play was written in 1947 but is set in 1912. Priestley is able to use hindsight to make comments on events with dramatic irony. Birling makes his ironic speeches about the good times ahead, the ‘unsinkable Titanic’, and ‘prosperity that will make war impossible’, to characters that are unaware of future events and the lessons they will be forced to learn in ‘fire, blood, and anguish’, that the audience of 1947 would have been fully aware of. For the audience the Inspector’s view of the world is an alternative to that presented by Birling.

Priestley’s influences for the manipulation of time are two theories: Ouspensky’s ‘A New Model of the Universe’, and Dunne’s idea that individuals could look forward aswell as backwards in time. Dunne’s idea is used most prominently with the Inspector, as he has seemed to look forward in time to see Eva Smith’s suicide. Fire blood and anguish is referring to the wars to come and brings the audience into contact with the thought that maybe the inspector isn’t all that he seems. This is where Dunne’s ides that individuals could look forward aswell as backward in time comes into the play.

Inspector Goole whether a real Inspector or not is Priestley’s instrument for teaching the moral lesson in the play. Birling has to learn a lot but especially that his workers (and other people even if they are of a lower class), are still people with their own lives, and feelings. The most important lesson that the whole family needs to learn (along with the people sitting in the audience), is that every action has a consequence and you must take responsibility for those actions, therefore the consequences aswell. This lesson is learnt well by the younger generation but not at all by the older generation, the Birling parents. Once the full extent of the situation is known then Birling thinks his conscience is clear and blames Eric, but as he reveals that ‘the Inspector took me by surprise’, his conscience obviously isn’t clear. Mrs. Birling delights in being ‘the only one who didn’t give in to him’, and misses the point completely. Gerald is non-committal as ever, but Sheila and Eric appreciate the irrelevance of the Inspector’s true identity. His comment ‘You see, we have to share something. If there’s nothing else, we’ll have to share our guilt’, is understood by Sheila, but as the idea of community is still alien to the Birling parents, they cannot relate to it. Mr. and Mrs. Birling, represent the values of the Capitalist Empire that have refused to learn important lessons about collective responsibility. They are now going to be forced to learn them by a younger generation with more appropriate values.

The audience came to J.B.Priestley’s play expecting to see a detective thriller. The play they saw showed no act of suicide and it contained no imprisonable offence. The plot was a moral lesson in the form of the Inspector trying to make the characters realise the error of their ways. As the Birling parents are only worried about what they told the ‘fake’ Inspector, and how the information could affect their social status, J.B. Priestley adds the final twist to really teach them the lesson. A phone call, ‘the telephone rings sharply. There is a moment of complete silence. Birling goes to answer it’. Birling is thrown off for a moment. Instead of letting Edna the maid answer the phone for him, he picks it up. The one way telephone conversation adds to the tension. Birling says slowly that the Infirmary had called and that ‘a girl has just died – after swallowing some disinfectant. And a police inspector is on his way here – to ask some – questions’.

That is the very end of the play and the curtain falls. There is no conclusion or epilogue to round off the play. But that is what makes it so entertaining. There is mystery and a chance for the audience to make up their own minds about how the family will be able to cope with another inspector and all his questions. The characters are already exhausted, confused and emotionally drained, and although the audience can now relax and return to reality, you feel that for the Birling family it is not over.

The powerful ending showing the recycling of events is about to begin, and the rest is left to the imagination. This makes Priestley’s play different to a usual detective thriller, and more educational and as well as entertaining, more thought provoking. Because that is the aim of the play; to affect the audience enough to make them think about their own lives fears, hopes, suffering and chances of happiness.

The play is hard-hitting on the audience, as there may well be people that can relate to the Birling parent’s status and therefore have to ask themselves how they would react in such a situation, (no matter how extreme it may seem). ‘An Inspector Calls’ keeps your interest throughout with a mixture of mystery, intrigue and a need to see how the Inspector and Birling face their own total opposites. Questions arise, like ‘How would I have treated Eva Smith?’ ‘Would I have accepted the blame?’ ‘What are my beliefs on the subject of community?’ ‘Am I a Mr. Birling or an Inspector Goole in my beliefs?’ and ‘Has the world’s attitude changed at all from 1912, to this day?’ There are so many questions that are designed to help the audience to help themselves. Mr. Birling’s views are portrayed as wrong and the Inspector’s are right. So, if the world still hasn’t learned the valuable lesson, then we will be forced to learn it again and again and again in ‘fire and blood and anguish’ until we understand.

Philippa Young