“An impression of massiveness, solidity and purposefulness,” is the initial and complete description of the inspector. This effective yet brief and general description of the character suggests that it may have been based on Priestley himself. This is apparent in the similarities in characteristics and sense of humour. The play provides scope for the audience to identify the inspector in their own way. The inspector’s character is enhanced by the use of lines that are effectively questions showing a degree of inner certainty. Each question is answer that is met with agreement by the Birling in question. “And you made love again….. yes.” The impression given by the inspector is one that brings fictional elements to life. Throughout the whole ordeal the inspector manages to stay unfailingly polite despite considerable ignorance on the Birling families’ part. This demonstrates the class barrier that existed at that time between the higher and lower classes. He increasingly emotionally attached to the death of Eva Smith, more so than a normal and professional police inspector would, this I consider a chink in the armour of what otherwise is a physical representation that is the inspector. By identifying these subtle hints such as that one the audience may begin to form a new understanding of the inspector.
Mr. Birlings’ speech tells us that he is unwilling to accept that he may incorrect as he lacks common knowledge in anything other than industry. Sybil is a disciplined character that seems to scare Mr. Birling and influence what he says “Sheila, I simply don’t understand your attitude,” “Neither do I, if you had any sense of loyalty.” As the questioning develops so does the verbal power of the inspector. This, however, goes unnoticed by the Birlings as each has been made to feel accused despite their innocence. The inspector’s method of speech is so contradictory to the hyperbole spoken so confidently by Mr. Birling that he feels threatened by the inspectors ability to undermine his authority, “Could I have a drink first,” “No,” “Yes,” “Alright go then.”
J.B Priestley was well known for his ability to incorporate time in his plays. An Inspector Calls creates a real and believable sense of safety for the audience and collapses that gradually as the inspector develops. Throughout his life Priestley was interested in the theories of Jung and Ouspensky; this would tell us that he believed a policeman in our dreams usually signifies our conscience. The inspector has an aura of mystery that allows him to have a sharp penetrating quality gained by his inner knowledge. As the play develops the audience begin to feel that it is a slight coincidence the whole family being caught up in one girl. Yet the power and precise accuracy of the inspectors recollection leads each member of the family to feel that they have committed an individual murder where as none of them has committed a punishable crime. The lack of law-related allegations also begins to expose signs of unreality. At no point does he mention any charges or threaten them with any penalty. Yet there seems to be an orthodox and almost religious quality in the way he can pursue such a case with only guilt as his virtue. The inspector could have been a ghost yet he did not haunt them or continue to do so until they were sorry for the events they had caused, he has simply made them aware of there actions. His knowledge about them all suggests that he is their collective conscience. Priestley being well known for his time-slip concepts uses an allegory to introduce a new possibility to the audiences’ understanding of the play. The audience may begin to realise that the inspector is the result of their actions not a preventer of further actions. The inspector serves to make the Birlings realise the effect they have had on people financially and socially inferior to them such as Eva/Daisy. He is also a voice for Eva and the lower members of the very hierarchical society that existed then. All this serves as an attempt to make all the Birlings reform their actions.
The inspector manages to break each defence wall built up by the family yet as soon as he leaves, the Birling elders and Gerald fall back upon their faultless and self-assured lives. Sheila and Eric, however, seem much more emotionally and morally affected by the word of the inspector and show much more will to change their way of life. This brings the plot of the play to a conclusion; never the less Priestley uses this divided emotion to perform a final trick rather than providing a rational explanation. He gradually lulls the audience away form the boundaries of reality making the unexpected seem logical. His use of the last phone call is intended as a punishment for the family’s refusal to appreciate what they have learnt. The phone call revives the guilt within each of the Birling elders and Gerald. Therefore giving the impression that there may be a possibility that the same inspector is may return, an infinite cycle until the lesson is learnt. The way in which Priestley wrote “An Inspector Calls,” tells us more about the characters than they themselves know. We manage to satisfy our questions from the information yet are puzzled by the mystery and unforeseeable outcome.
Conclusively “An Inspector Calls,” is a relevant play that expresses the reality of desperation, especially at the time when it was written. By using his skill of incorporating the audience into his writing Priestley is able to get a strong and noticeable moral across that can express the true nature and purpose for writing the play. Ultimately the play realises that the truth cannot be hidden, there is always a witness to what happened, when and where. Although put into a supernatural context the moral remains the same within a thrilling and dramatic production “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to relive it.” - Santayana
Hasan Al-hasani
