Show how Priestley dramatizes the message of this plays that: We don't live alone. We are members of one body. We are responsible for each other.

ABHINAV SINGH 11 ‘G’

BOSTON GRAMMAR SCHOOL CENTRE NO- 26310

English Literature Coursework Assignment: An Inspector Calls by J.B.Priestley

QUESTION-

Show how Priestley dramatizes the message of this plays that: We don’t live alone. We are members of one body. We are responsible for each other.

The play An Inspector Calls was written in 1945, around the closing stages of the World War II. As a result the play’s content is highly reflective of the grave situation at hand. To understand Priestley’s point of view in this play, we have to look back at his experiences of previous wars. He served in the British infantry during the First World War. Thus, he wrote the play from a view of promoting equality and respecting mankind. He felt this would be achieved by freeing mankind from constraints of social classes and other petty aspects. Thus, the whole play has a left-wing Socialist approach, something Priestley picked up through his experiences of war.

The political theme of this play is continued by one of the leading characters in the play: Arthur Birling plays the role of a typical businessman of the time. As a 1912 businessman his views about society are limited: all he has time for is maintaining the balance between the labour force and the employers, this being the key for gaining prosperity:

We employers at last are coming together to see that our interests – and the interests of Capital – are properly protected

AND

…by that time you’ll be living in a world that’ll have forgotten all these Capital versus Labour agitations.

However, in the lines above, Birling is shown to be a representative of Capitalist principles, because he is very concerned about the margins of profits that could be obtained. A Socialist would see these points as denouncement to a community’s advancement as a whole, as Capitalism mainly concentrates on individual profits. Birling is also prophesying that in the near future all the problems between the workers and their employers will be solved. Birling also insults Russia’s economy because being a follower of Capitalism naturally means denouncement of Communist ways:

There’ll be peace and prosperity and rapid progress everywhere – except of course in Russia which will always be behindhand naturally.

The last denouncement that Birling has to offer is towards the public figures such as George Bernard Shaw and H. G. Wells. This is because these people were beginning to question and challenge the traditional constraints placed on the people, which interfered their right of true expressions:

...the way some of these cranks talk and write now, you’d think everyone has to look after everyone else, as if we were all mixed up together like bees ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

There’ll be peace and prosperity and rapid progress everywhere – except of course in Russia which will always be behindhand naturally.

...the way some of these cranks talk and write now, you’d think everyone has to look after everyone else, as if we were all mixed up together like bees in a hive – community and all that nonsense.

Now if we look at the theme of the play in detail: at the start it seems that the play was going to be a straight forward detective thriller. It seems that a high-ranking, prosperous family has been caught up in a scandal. At first however, we have to review the relationship between the Birling family and Gerald Croft. Gerald is getting married to Sheila, who is Mr. Birling’s daughter. The first account of a tension in relationships can be viewed at the dinner party, which under the cloak of ceremonial value contains tensions and internal conflict. Priestley illustrates this through the subtle language of the characters. The reference below is, Sheila talking about Gerald’s apparent absence last year:

(half serious, half playful)Yes – except for all last summer when you never came near me, and I wondered what had happened to you.

On occasions Mrs. Birling also corrects her husband’s mistake, which reveals a layer of underlying tension:

BIRLING Well, well – this is very nice. Very nice. Good dinner too Sybil. Tell cook for me.

MRS (reproachfully) Arthur, you’re not supposed to say such things-

BIRLING

It seems that Mrs. Birling is not comfortable with the Socialist idea of equality and prefers the Capitalist idea of having constraints on the social classes. Later on in the party, things turn to family structures. Mr. Birling compares his family to Gerald’s, and announces that the Croft’s indeed have a better social status. However, he is very casual and complacent to point out the fact regarding his imminent knighthood:

So – well – I gather there’s a very good chance of a knighthood – so long as we behave ourselves, don’t get into the police court or start a scandal – eh? (laughs complacently).

This last remark, of course, is an example of prolepsis- the Birlings have no idea what is about to happen to them. The atmosphere is set and the tension is mounting. All this reaches a crescendo with the abrupt arrival of the Inspector. From this point onwards, the audience are well entertained as the Inspector brings the underlying tensions of the family to the surface. He questions each family member in turn and informs them of their involvement in the suicide of a working-class girl called Eva Smith. However, the audience also realizes that as the play progresses the omniscient nature of the Inspector increases: gradually it emerges that the play might also have a theme regarding morals.

J. B. Priestley achieves this stunning effect through using the Inspector as a character, who knows more than the eyes see. He uses the Inspector as someone who encourages others to question their decisions and then feel remorse; all this is achieved through the carefully weighted dialogue of the Inspector. The Inspector’s body language, dictated by Priestley also plays a major role. The Inspector’s quality of exerting a hypnotically direct message to the people in the room seems to knock the confidence out of even the most self-satisfied and respectable family (Birlings). The Inspector can be easily recognised to be a pivotal character of the play because at each stage he reveals new details, this helps to move the plot swiftly on. The Inspector controls the rate of the play by balancing the tension put on each character through his intense questioning.

The astounding factor is that throughout his investigations the Inspector pays no attention to the social status of the Birling family. He doesn’t conform to their expected standards: he frequently interrupts the members, cutting across their replies and persistently repeating questions. Unsurprisingly, Mrs. Birling isn’t charmed by the Inspector:

Well, I must say his manner was quite extraordinary; so – so rude – assertive -

The language used by the Inspector is blunt yet emotional. Priestley uses clever language to make the sentences direct and powerful:

A girl died tonight. A pretty, lively sort of girl who never did anybody any harm. But she died in misery and agony – hating life -

Above is the Inspector’s account of how Eva Smith died an agonising death. The sentence is direct yet very emotional. However, there is a stark contrast between the Inspector’s direct language and the Birling family’s meandering waffle:

She was claiming elaborate fine feelings and scruples that were simply absurd in a girl in her position.

Even Gerald’s language is meandering; he beats round the bush, avoiding the point. We find out later in the play, he does this to buy himself time and avoid giving anything away to Sheila:

I went down into the bar for a drink. It’s a favourite haunt of women of the town.

The Inspector seems to belong to no social class; he gives nothing away throughout the play. Priestley portrays him like a highly moral character, who looks at all the evidence in a fair sort of way. The Inspector seems to be above all social backgrounds; this can be seen through his treatment of the others. Priestley emphasises equality through the Inspector’s behaviour. The Inspector also pays little attention to Mr. Birling’s abusive language and insults; he simply does his job in a fair fashion. When Mrs. Birling refers to the dead girl as from that class, the Inspector refuses to stoop to that low level and refer to the victim as that young woman giving the dead victim some integrity.

Now, if we connect the Inspector’s behaviour to the constant message being delivered by the play- We don’t live alone. We are members of one body. We are responsible for each other- it can be seen that the Inspector conveys the message very powerfully, through the use of various subtle phrases:

There isn’t as much a difference as you might think between the respectable people and the criminals

AND

Public men have responsibilities as well as privileges

AND

We have to share something. If there’s nothing else, we must share guilt.

Priestley hammers home the point that everyone in the society should lookout for everyone else. This is the way to progress forward and that for oneself to isolate himself is a highly damaging prospect for the society. The play shows that selfish individuals such as the Birlings can inevitably have a cold and dangerous effect on the society.

However, the surprises aren’t over yet, Priestley adds the final twist to the interesting plot by revealing that Inspector Goole wasn’t even a real individual. Over the years, there have been many different interpretations of the Inspector. Some based around the fact that he might have been a embodiment of moral conscience. Others interpret the Inspector as being a ghost form of Eva Smith’s unborn child, a ghost who wants his mother’s killers to feel their guilt.

However, the Inspector still has a humbling effect on the Birlings. Sheila and Gerald later appreciate that the legality and the fashion of the inquiry is irrelevant:

He was our police Inspector all right!

Thus, it seems that Priestley’s writing conveys not a legal form of inquiry (detective thriller) but a moral examination of how the individual’s actions impact on the society as a whole.

WORD COUNT- 1,610