Imagine you are directing a production of an Inspector calls. Explain how you would direct it to bring out the themes and issues that priestly explores.

Natalie Clarke

An Inspector Calls Essay-GCSE English Coursework

An Inspector Calls is a story tightly structured around three acts and with no change of scene. It is based around the Birlings, an upper class, British family. Set in 1912, although the story was written in 1945, under the interrogation of a familiar inspector, each member of the family admits their shameful secrets. The story has been set in 1912 before major events have occurred. This may have been done to help bring in dramatic irony especially in Mr Birlings opening speech. At first glance this play seems to be a straight forward detective thriller, but as it progresses it becomes a morality play which is used to put across J.B Priestleys ideas and allow the audience to question their own morals.

To begin the first Act, I would seat the Birling family around a long, mahogany dinner table. A large, glass chandelier would paint the room in a dim yellow glow. Mr Birling would head the table to show he is the head of the house. Using chandeliers, the best china and the characters dressed in their finest attire would help to display the Birlings wealth and upper class status. As Edna provides the port she would place it in front of Mr Birling and remain silent. This would support the fact the Birling was head of the household and also portray Edna as unequal to the Birling family.

Although it is a joyous occasion for the family, due to the engagement between Sheila and Gerald croft, a hint of unease still lingers. This could be because the croft family have not attended the gathering and also because of Sheila’s “playful” comments about Gerald and his whereabouts over the summer. Gerald’s parents may not have attended the dinner as they may have felt that Gerald was marrying into a social inferior family.

Sheila’s comments about Gerald’s whereabouts over the summer “when you never came near me” may not have been as playful as first thought. To emphasise the importance of this piece of dialogue I would dim the lights on stage apart from a spotlight on the couple. Also each of the other characters would hold a still image so as not to distract attention away from Gerald and Sheila. When Mrs Birling speaks the light should return to normal and the characters begin to move once again. This contrasts between two small sections of Act 1 helped to keep the audiences interest.

Later on in this act the subject of Gerald and Sheila’s romance is bought up once again. In this section he produces the engagement ring that she wanted and they also vow to drink to each other. During this part of the act I would use pink lighting on stage, violin music playing and a picture of roses projected on to the wall. This dramatization would over exaggerate the feeling of love, so much so that the audience will see it as false. This is useful when Gerald’s secret affair is realized. As Eric says, “steady the buffs” once again everything will return to normal, bringing contrast in small sections throughout the play.

This play was set in 1912 before many major events, allowing priestly to incorporate dramatic irony into Mr Birlings speech. The audience will know that the things Mr Birlings predicts will not occur. Also as Mr Birling sees himself as a “hard headed practical man of business” he looks more foolish to the audience when they know he is wrong. To emphasis the irony of sections of his speech, I would use pictures projected on to the walls and sound effects from the event. As Mr Birling describes the titanic as “unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable” pictures of the ship sinking and front pages of newspapers publicizing the event could be projected on to the wall behind Mr Birling. Therefore the audience can see the irony of Mr Birling’s words. Further on in this speech Mr Birling states “in 1940 you may be giving…silly little war scares”. Priestly may have wanted this ironic point to be highlighted especially as he fought in the first world war as Mr Birling says these words I would have short films of the war projected on to the wall. Then to increase dramatic shock I would have a picture of a soldiers nametag lying in the mud the nametag would be engraved with the name “Croft”. Sounds of bombs being dropped and babies crying would also help highlight this major theme.

After dinner the ladies leave the dinning room and allow the men of the family to start their own conversation. During this conversation between Mr Birling, Eric and Gerald a triangle of power is easily noticeable. The dialogue can be directed to using many different tones of voice to express the different moods the men are in.

This is a preview of the whole essay

It is more difficult to distinguish which lines are being spoken by Gerald and Mr Birling than those that are spoken by Eric, as both Mr Birling and Gerald are very alike in their tones, manner and words. As Mr Birling is trying to impress Gerald he would most probably try to imitate Gerald’s character. Gerald refers to a private conversation “ only something we were talking about when you were out”, this isolates Eric. Mr Birling also defends Gerald over the joke about Eric and criticizes Eric for his lack of humour “What’s the mater with you?”; this further isolates and humiliates Eric in front of Gerald.

The lines, which are spoken by certain characters, are easily distinguished by the tone they are spoken in a worried, evasive manner, while Mr Birling and Gerald’s lines are all said quite jokingly. This helps to emphasise the similarity between Mr Birling and Gerald. Also from earlier conversations we can tell both Gerald and Mr Birling have similar priorities are compiled of money and business, while Eric does not see interested.

While they are speaking, Edna announces the arrival of the Inspector. To automatically bring tension to the play and to show that the arrival of the inspector is a very important part of play, I would change the lighting to a very bright sharp white light as soon as he enters.

When Mr. Birling offers the inspector a drink he refuses. This may put Mr Birling on edge, as he cannot be sure that the Inspector is on his side. Also to increase the tension between Mr Birling and the Inspector, the inspector uses short answer that keep give little information,“No, Mr Birling” . This shows that the inspector does not think of himself as socially lower class than Mr Birling and is not intimidated by the Birling family or household.

The Inspector uses very direct questions and does not give away any extra information when he is inspecting the characters. Directing the inspector to stare at the person he is questioning and even leaning close to the person would help to show how intimidating Inspector Goole could be, instead of being intimidated himself.

As the inspector continues his questioning of Mr Birling, Mr Birling tries to influence and even threaten the inspector to treat him with awe and more respect. This is shown in the line “ Perhaps I ought to warn you … at the West Brumley”. The Inspector never seems uneasy by the Birling family manner, or social superiority.

For most of the questioning the Inspector remains calm and quite restrained with his frustration, but as the play progresses the Inspector begins to answer very sharply in lines such as “ I don’t want any of it from either of you.” This he states is due to the fact “that I haven’t much time”.

While the Inspector is questioning the family some of his points could also be said to the audience, so as to seem as if he is questioning the audience too. Facing the audience when he asks the question “why?” can cause the audience to question themselves. This links with Priestley’s central purpose, as he wants the audiences to question themselves, and to put themselves in the same situation, therefore making them more aware of their place in the world and the community.

The second member of the family that is questioned by the Inspector is Sheila. At the beginning of Sheila’s monologue she does not seem to be resentful for her input in Eva/Daisy’s death. Sheila’s monologue should be spoken at quite a fast speed and in a very confident voice so as to show her inconsiderate attitude. As she recalls the event in the lines “well this girl…and it just suited her” Sheila should fix her gaze over the audiences heads to portray the feeling that she is remembering the incident. In contrast when Sheila says, “just as I was the wrong type” she should look directly at Gerald, as if to imply she is the wrong type for him also. This helps to build up extra tension in the scene and shows further insight into the emotions Sheila is feeling. Sheila could start pacing as she says “I was rude to both…had been very impertinent” to show she is beginning to get tense and then once again to keep interest she could perform a contrasting movement like a spin toward the audience on the line “how could I know what would have happened afterwards”. Emphasis should be placed on the “I” in this sentence as it makes Sheila feel much more desperate and helpless. Finally near the end of Sheila’s speech the line “but she was very pretty…couldn’t be sorry for her” is said to try and justify her actions which were very petty. Highlighting the “was” in this sentence helps to portray Sheila as weak but trying to justify her actions as best she can.

Mr Birling’s attitude to the women in his family is to try and shield them from listening to scandal and stories about people they know. An example of this is when Mr. Birling tries to persuade Sheila to leave the room when Gerald is about to explain his involvement with Eva; “ Yes, yes. But I see no point in mentioning the subject-especially- (indicating Sheila)”. Both Sheila and Mrs Birling (in different occasions) refuse to leave the room or return to it quickly. This could be due to social movements that occurred in 1912 such as the Suffragette movement. Although many women who were upper class did not agree with the movement, Sheila and Mrs Birling may still have been slightly influenced by their views. Many of the girls who took part in the Suffragette movement were female workers, much in the same position as Eva. As we can see from the way the characters of the Birling Family describe Eva, they believe that because of poor social status, she is worth nothing and must not have any brains or morales. Throughout the play both the man and women describe Eva Smith. They frequently use words such as pretty and good-looking and give little insight into her character. Describing Eva in this way helps to portray her as an animal much more than a person, and also shows the extent of consideration towards her by the Birling family, because she is from a lower social class. Also because of her class, Mrs Birling assumes Eva would have turned to crime or prostitution once she lost her job at Milwards. This is shown in the line “ Have you any idea what happened to her after that? Get into trouble? Go on the streets?” and shows she is very condescending in her manner. All the members of the Birling family refer to Eva as ‘the girl’, this is very dismissive and demonstrates their lack of compassion, although each had an input into her death.

Even though they are both of a high social status, a conversation between Sheila and Gerald show the inferiority of women in this time. Gerald treated Sheila with devotion before she realized that he had been having an affair. After this whenever Sheila made a comment Gerald used quite abrupt even rude answers such as “you’re going to be a great help I can see”. This helps to emphasise the distance between the two characters and is in total contrast with the devoted act earlier in the play.

The use of exits and entrances throughout the three acts help to increase tension and also lead on to the next secret to be exposed. At the end of Act 2 the Birling family and the Inspector are waiting for Eric to return, as it had been revealed that he had made Eva Smith pregnant. This entrance releases the tension that was built up during the questioning of Mrs Birling. The issue of Eva Smiths pregnancy was brought up during the interrogation of Mrs Birling, and she ordered the inspector to do his duty and humiliate the boy who had done this. Tension increasingly builds up as she describes the punishment the boy should receive. When the Inspector says he is waiting “ to do my duty” and when Eric returns from his walk, this tension is released, as we know whom the culprit is.

In contrast the Inspector entering at the end of Act 1 brings tension back to the play, as we know further interrogation will follow shortly and that more secrets will be revealed. This section of the story helps to build up much more tension as we can tell from the beginning that each member of the family will have to expose their hidden secrets, and also one by one. The Inspectors unusual way of questioning also makes us feel that there is something odd about him, although we cannot be sure of what.

The Inspectors last speech is a very important part of the play, as it is one of the main sections when Priestley’s ideas are exposed through the character of Inspector Goole. In this section of the play, the Inspector has finally become annoyed with the Birling family and would say much of this speech in a loud confident voice, and at a rather fast pace. As he says the word “ you can’t even say ‘I’m sorry Eva Smith.’” He should speak slowly and quietly with a pause at the end, so as to give them a short amount of time to reflect on their input in the death. The Inspector should begin to get louder and louder as he states the list of three in his speech; “their lives, their hopes and fears, their suffering and chance of happiness”. This will help to build up the speech into a climax and by shouting as he says “fire and blood and anguish”, which may refer to the first and second world wars, the tension and intimidation is built up. This line is also a list of three and therefore automatically signals a line of great importance, and one of the major themes in the play. The tension which built up is released as the inspector says “Good night” and leaves the room, and the play.

Priestly may have decided to end the play in a questioning way as it helps the audience to question themselves about their own morales. Ending the play in this way brings the story into a complete circle. As only Eric and Sheila seem to have learnt a lesson from the nights interrogation and the rest of the family return to their normal lifestyles, believing nothing has happened or changed, ending in this way also allows the audience to leave the theatre wondering how each character will react to the second Inspectors presence.

Display Inspector Goole as a fake helps us to understand that he was a device to get us to all examine our consciences and to convey Priestleys beliefs of unity portrayed in the Inspectors last speech. These beliefs include that everyone’s lives are entwined and that “we don’t live alone, we are members of one body”. Inspector Goole could also be seen as an angel, as the voice of consciences and even as the soul of the unborn baby Eva was carrying, as these would all have a reason for knowing the story of Eva Smiths death and also for wanting the Birling family to change.

Personally, I felt An Inspector Calls was quite simple to direct as it was obvious which parts of the play would need to be emphasised because of their importance. Using lighting and projections adds further dramatic enjoyment and helps to highlight the main sections of the play, which convey Priestley’s ideas, beliefs, or experiences of the war. I believe this play is still enjoyable for modern audiences as it much a play about ourselves, in that the questioning directed at the Birlings could also be directed at the audience, and therefore keeps them involved throughout the performance.