“Priestley’s voice, a voice of social criticism and conscience.”
Priestley extends the use of social criticism, by the manipulation of authority. At the beginning of the play, it seems to be that Arthur Birling has all the authority, as he boasts about thinking that he is in the next Honours List and will get a knighthood. He also displays pride about being Lord Mayor and delivers an ironic speech about war and technology. For example,
“The world’s developing so fast it’ll make war impossible.”
Priestley then continues the use of authority by showing how the older generation believe that they are always right. For instance, As Birling is the oldest member of the family; he believes that he is superior to every family member in the dining room; where the play is set. He shows confidence in his actions and speech, but this eventually does not prove to be advantage to him by the end of the play.
In contrast, as soon as the Inspector walks into the dining room, everyone shows respect towards him. For example, Gerald asks the Inspector for permission to go for a walk. However, he does not ask Arthur Birling. This shows that the Inspector gains the authority, which Arthur Birling cares more about than Eva Smith.
The Inspector’s supremacy strengthens his moral tone; he does this when he overrides Arthur Birling by telling Eric that he can “wait his turn.”
Along with his impatience to get on with his questioning, where he says, that he hasn't “much time”. A police officer would take as much time as they would need.
In addition, Arthur Birling tries to regain his authority by boasting about playing golf with the Chief Constable. The Inspector not only says, “I don’t play golf,” he also says “I’ve never wanted to play.” Undermining Birling’s authority once again. Furthermore, Priestley’s criticism was concerned with the way the upper class treat the working class. For example, the exploitation of the working class by the middle and upper classes, he accomplishes this by portraying the Birlings as a Middle Class, Capitalist family, while using Eva smith to represent the working class.
He shows that the social class system was based upon hypocrisy, lies and selfishness. It used and abused those in the working class, then ‘threw them out’ if they became inconvenient and no longer useful, such as, the use of Eva Smith by each family member. Priestley was trying to tell us that each member of the Birlings and Gerald Croft used Eva Smith in one-way or another. Once they used her, they did not want to know her, showing the use of their selfishness and irresponsibility.
Moreover, Priestley also criticises the way certain people do not realise or accept that their actions have consequences for which they are responsible. This was also a main theme of Priestley’s plays, in which he used for ‘An Inspector Calls’.
This criticism occurs when the Inspector questions Mrs. Birling. He answers his own questions if he is not happy with the reply he gets. The Inspector contradicts what is being said to him; as he says, “You mean you don’t choose to do, Mrs Birling” and most importantly, “You’re not telling me the truth.”
He does this with Sybil Birling, who is stubbornly refusing to admit there was a committee meeting two weeks previously and that she met Eva Smith there. The Inspector says,
“You know very well there was, Mrs Birling. You were in the chair.”
This demonstrates that Priestley does not believe in the Capitalist views on the social class system and he portrays the Inspector is “classless.”
The Birling family lack any sense of morals because they believe that they are at a higher class and are superior to everyone else, but the Inspector is there to teach them the moral code. It is Arthur Birling who is affected the most from not having any morals. We see this as, Priestley’s views do not go along with Birling’s. We also find out that Birling lives in a false sense of security. Priestley shows this by adding statements to make the audience see Birling’s views are naïve.
These statements are his predictions from his ironic speech. For example, He describes the Titanic as,
"unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable", he also shows his views on war,
"The Germans don't want a war. Nobody wants a war" and that
"we're in for a time of increasing prosperity."
This gives the audience the impression that all his views are wrong.
But as we know, each prediction that Birling made was incorrect; the Titanic sank on her maiden voyage and World War I broke out two years after the play was set. This is an example of dramatic irony used in the play.
Nonetheless, Birling is easily irritated, as the Inspector barely says twenty words before Birling begins to show “a touch of impatience” and irritation.
He says to Sheila that the Inspector is going to leave. The Inspector contradicts Birling once again by saying “I’m afraid not.”
In addition, Priestley shows criticism of the deceitfulness and hypocrisy of the upper classes through the use of Sheila Birling. For instance, the way that Sheila Birling treated Eva Smith. Sheila thought that she was better than Eva and felt threatened and jealous of her. Sheila then used her high status in society to get Eva sacked. This shows the hypocrisy used by Sheila and the deceitful ways that the upper class were allowed to take advantage of the social classes below them at the time of when the play was set.
Priestley uses the Inspector to criticise his views, as Tony Benn stated,
“Priestley was an influential man.”
This is what Priestley was trying to achieve by adding the character of the Inspector. He wanted to influence the members of the Birling family to take responsibility for their actions.
The Inspector was there to teach them morals, but this did not work, as some family members were relieved to find out that the Inspector was a fraud. But when they found out a “real” Inspector is on his way to ask questions about the death of a girl; it raises the tension of the play for its cliffhanger ending. The genre of these types of plays is like a ‘whodunit’ mystery, which adds to the suspense of the play and its intentions.
Furthermore, Priestley uses Inspector Goole to speak for the lower, working class and Priestley’s conscience, as Tony Benn had mentioned in his article,
‘The ’45 Election’. Priestley himself was a Socialist and hated the Capitalist society. He uses the Birlings as a typical Capitalist family, he criticises the way that each member of the Birlings and Gerald Croft treat Eva Smith unfairly.
The timing of the Inspector’s entrances and exits is perfect; for example, Priestley times the entrance of Inspector Goole as soon as Arthur Birling is in the middle of a speech about a man looking having to after himself,
“A man has to make his own way…” and
“…a man has to mind his own business and look after himself and his own…”
It is here, where the Inspector interrupts Arthur Birling’s speech. This shows a critical time in the play, where Priestley replies to his speech, by the Inspector’s arrival to contradict with Arthur Birling.
Priestley suggests the Inspector’s appearance in the stage directions.
He is shown to create,
“an impression of massiveness, solidity and purposefulness.”
Priestley also says that public men have,
“responsibilities as well as privileges.”
He is probably a man in his 50s and dressed in a well-tailored suit of that period.
The Inspector was there to teach the family a lesson on responsibility for one’s actions; as mentioned before. His duty was to ask questions and find out why it had happened.
The Inspectors use of references to Eva’s death is carefully worded, as he knew far too much, about a girl who he had never met. But the only reason why he knows so much by the fact that Eva/Daisy kept “a rough sort of diary.” He also uses her death to bring guilt upon the family members.
Nevertheless, as his duty was to ask questions, he used tactical ways in achieving this. He does not ask a lot of questions, but whenever he does ask, they all seem to immediately confess to helping with Eva/Daisy’s death. He is very grave in the way he speaks; he does not make any jokes and forces everyone to take him seriously. Also, he uses a lot of emotive language; he describes Eva/Daisy as a “pretty” and “lively” girl, who died in “misery and agony – hating life.”
Additionally, the Inspector’s stage directions and positions are crucial to the play, as he takes a habit of looking hard at the person he is interrogating before he speaks to them. The Inspector is very demanding and is constantly cutting in sharply. He also only shows the photo to one person at a time and hints that there might be a serious reason for that; therefore we begin to suspect whether he shows each person the same photo or a different photo. Priestley does this to make an impact on the audience and tries to make them think about why the Inspector had done that.
Furthermore, the Inspector’s final speech suggests, that we should accept responsibility for each other;
“We are responsible for each other”
The speech is not only referring to the Birlings but to the whole of society. Therefore, Priestley adds a clear warning (through the Inspector) about what could happen if; some members of the family were to ignore their responsibility:
"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."
This speech leaves the Birlings and the audience with something to think about and
it seems that Priestley set out to do this intentionally.
The speech was to teach them morals on social responsibility and what would happen if they ignored it.
Moreover, he leaves the Birlings, when they are feeling very guilty, but that does not apply to all of them, the younger generation of Sheila and Eric believe that there was a lesson to be learnt from the evening, as Sheila describes says,
“If it didn’t end tragically, then that’s lucky for us. But it might have done.”
This shows that Sheila & Eric hold true to their moral instincts, But the rest of them were relieved to find out about the Inspector and take the whole situation as a complete joke, as Arthur Birlings states,
“…younger generation who know it all. And they can’t even take a joke-“
They act selfishly and never take responsibility for their actions.
Priestley then leaves the character of the Inspector as a mystery so it has a larger impact on the audience, making them think more about the play, and helping them think more about the messages the play brings. It also increases the feelings of tension in the play.
The introduction of a ‘real’ Inspector at the end of the play will teach the Birlings their lesson again. This proves Inspector Goole’s idea that if you don't learn the lesson the first time, you will be taught it again, through
"fire and blood and anguish.”
In Conclusion, The Inspector’s message symbolises the fact that if you do not learn your lesson the first time, you will be taught it again and again. It signifies that you can't run from your conscience, as the Birlings will find out. Priestley uses the dramatic twist of an Inspector returning at the end of the play, to emphasis this point, and makes it more effective by placing it just as the characters are beginning to relax.
In addition, the use of the Inspector’s name, Inspector Goole; indicates how ‘Goole’ sounds like ‘Ghoul’ as a ghost. This is an example of a homophone. Priestley uses this name as pun. He could of chosen the name ‘Goole’ purposely to bring irony.
To conclude the end of the play, I was left feeling as if I would like to think I had learned from the example of the Birlings and the message it contained. The ending is well structured, leaving a dramatic effect, but there is not really another way to have ended the play after that twist.
I think the majority of people who have seen this play would have liked to think of themselves as Eric or Sheila.
The aim of Priestley when he wrote this play, I believe, was to make us think, to make us question our own characters and beliefs. He structured his social criticism very well. This was put across to the audience in an extraordinary way. He wasted no time to show us that we can change, and we can decide which views we side with. Priestley wanted the audience to learn from the mistakes of the Birlings. I think that Priestley wanted to make a difference; not a world changing difference, but a small difference in the way people think. It would have changed people’s views on society, and so Priestley achieved his aims in writing the play.
