He is not as harsh towards Sheila and Eric because they learn a lesson; stopping Sheila blaming herself too much. “So I’m really responsible?” she asks. “No, not entirely”. They have behaved badly and do not care if the Inspector is a real police officer or not. “It doesn’t matter now of course - but was he really a police inspector”. They represent the younger generation, who learn from their mistakes, and will consider their behaviour towards others from now on. Mr and Mrs Birling represent capitalism; they are more concerned with themselves and self-preservation “Well, if he wasn’t, it matters a devil of a lot. Makes all the difference”. They promote sturdy individualism and industrialism; Priestley finds these ideas grossly wrong and damns it in many of his works.
The inspector tells the gathering that he read a diary belonging to Eva Smith; however, how he made connections to the family is unknown “She told me nothing. I never spoke to her”. He responds to body language and peoples reactions e.g. Gerald; “As soon as I mentioned the name Daisy Renton, it was obvious you’d known her”, managing to speculate and expand upon small pieces of information. Nothing he is told surprises him; we get the feeling that he knows each persons involvement, but wishes to hear it from them. In making the characters admit to their wrongdoings, Goole makes the family judge themselves, becoming their confessor and reveals their moral crimes.
Gerald introduces the idea that it may have been a hoax and nothing will come of their exposure; “There’s no more real evidence we did [lead to her death] than there was that chap was a real police inspector”. Sheila is disgusted by the attitudes of Gerald and her father in thinking everything will go back to how it was. Mr Birling says, “I’m convinced it is. No police inquiry. No one girl that this all happened to. No scandal”. “Everything’s all right now, Sheila. What about this ring?” She feels they have not learnt the values she is now aware of e.g. the impact she has on other people’s lives. She feels it does not matter who the inspector was - the facts remain.
The whole family are aware that he does not seem altogether convincing as an inspector. He makes judgements about the family member’s characters, which they feel are unusual in a police inspector. “We hardly ever told him anything that he didn’t know” “The rude way he spoke to Mr Birling and me- it was quite extraordinary”.
The family is torn open, forced to address their problems, and the parents’ look set in their old ways. The Birlings refuse to learn over and over again, and finally when the telephone rings, we see that they will be forced to through this process again until they face up to what they have done. The family could not be criminally charged for their crimes, save Eric. The inspector shows them despite the fact they could get away with behaving this way, it was wrong and they should change. The play is based in nineteen twelve, but written just after the end of world war two, so the message of taking responsibility for one’s actions is especially well received and understood in his final speech. “We are responsible for each other. And I tell you that the time will come when, if men will not learn that lesson, then they will be taught it in fire blood and anguish.”
There is much speculation over the identity of the inspector. Priestley does not promote any single interpretation of him; this is deliberate because the unresolved figure of the inspector adds dramatic power to the ending.
Many theories have been suggested over time regarding the identity of the inspector, such as a real police inspector, someone who knew Eva, and the “Iceberg, which destroys the family ship”. I prefer this explanation because the family have no idea what is waiting for them; they are very grand and wealthy, just like the Titanic. The inspector is cold and destroys the unity of the family, casting them into insecurity. The damage the iceberg or inspector has caused them is irrevocable and the ship or family is changed forever. I do not think the inspector knew Eva, because Eva represents all under-class women. She serves to show how we can affect others and proves to the audience the lower classes do have morals. Sybil Birling says “She was claiming elaborate fine feelings and scruples that were simply absurd in a girl in her position” she was proven wrong.
There are ideas that Goole may have been a real police inspector, although he is clearly proved not to be; he does not conduct himself altogether as one. I think Goole represents social conscience in the context of world issues such as pending war, and in the Birlings’ behaviour towards others.
Priestley uses Inspector Goole as a device to expose the Birlings. He presents him as a typical police inspector in “whodunits” of the age, in his dress and manor. Instead of simply using one guise such as God or a political agitator, the form of the Inspector allows scope for a range of identities; his message remains the same whoever he is. His identity is less important however, than his message. Goole is the central character who neither forgives nor punishes. The family and Gerald’s involvement is exposed gradually and this is another way Priestley keeps the audiences’ attention. We do not know if there is one culprit more responsible for Eva Smith’s demise in the beginning, Sheila is desperate for assurance that she is not solely to blame; “I know I’m to blame- and I’m desperately sorry - but I can’t believe - I won’t believe - it’s simply my fault that in the end she - she committed suicide. That would be too horrible”. We find out towards the end that in fact everyone shares equal responsibility.
“This girl killed herself- and died a horrible death. But each of you helped kill her. Remember that.”
