What message do you think Priestley wanted to convey to his audience when he wrote 'An Inspector Calls'? Consider to what extent he was successful and how he achieved his aim.

Melissa Quazi English 14/05/02

‘An Inspector Calls’ J.B. Priestley

What message do you think Priestley wanted to convey to his audience when he wrote ‘An Inspector Calls’? Consider to what extent he was successful and how he achieved his aim.

‘An Inspector Calls’ is a play written in 1945 but set in 1912, which was before World War One, the Great Depression and World War Two. J.B. Priestley, an idealistic socialist, wrote the play trying to warn his audience of the problems of society as it was. The play set in Brumley, England was written at a time when communities were trying to rebuild themselves after World War Two and society was still divided into clear-cut classes. The story focuses on the Birlings celebrating an engagement when an Inspector calls. The Birlings are able to have these values because they have money, own a business and are prominent members of the higher class of society. This family like others at the time were capitalists, they believed that a person was worth the money they owned, they only earned money for themselves and their families. Priestley did not agree with this way of living, he felt that the community should be reformed to live by socialist views, which were that people should all be equal and work towards the good of the community.

Priestley used the play as an effort to reform the community he was living in. He used all of his characters to convince us of the need to change, but he implemented different dramatic techniques to manipulate our feelings and eventually our views. The social context of the play was complex, involving many factors. In each particular point Priestley tries to convince the audience, that the bad outcomes are due to the capitalist community, whilst a socialist society would have avoided these problems altogether. The capitalist families, such as the Birlings and Gerald Croft (Sheila Croft’s fiancée) seem to be ignorant of the lower classes; to set this scene, Priestley uses a stage direction of ‘The lighting should be pink and intimate until the Inspector arrives and then it should be brighter and harder’ (p1) to show this ignorance that the inspector lifts through his questioning. The pink lighting is almost like the Birling congregation is wearing rose–tinted glasses, which only emphasises Priestley’s dislike of capitalist practices.

In a capitalist society the rich would associate with the rich and only the rich, whilst Priestley was trying to promote the idea of trying to abolish these divides and make everyone equal. Priestley the socialist tried to convince the audience of his ideas. Although he never said the word ‘socialism’, he discreetly points out the flaws he saw in the current way of living, the ‘capitalist’ way of living. The Inspector was in the play to convey Priestley’s point of view and to draw out each of the characters involvement in the death of Eva Smith, who seems ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

“One Eva Smith has gone – but there are millions and millions and millions of Eva Smiths and John Smiths still left with us,” (p56)

This proves to me that Eva was a character Priestley used to touch the hearts of the audience (with the help of the inspector) due to her pitiful life and unfortunate meetings with this capitalist family.

Inspector Goole interrogates each member of the family, one person at a time, Priestley does this to build dramatic tension and lead the story where he wanted it to go. He slowly draws out the information and guilty connections they have, he permanently remains in control by deciding what happens and when. The Inspector first questions Arthur Birling, the head of this family. Birling owns a successful business, which had once employed Eva Smith, but decided to sack her because she had started a strike wanting “to average twenty-five shillings a week” (p14) instead of twenty-two and six shillings. Due to this, he fired her. His aim as a capitalist was to work towards “lower costs and higher prices” (p4) And therefore by giving higher wages, would not accomplish this plan. His actions appear to have started off the chain reaction that resulted in the suicide of Eva Smith. Birling showed no remorse at the death of Eva and his obvious connection to it, Priestley did this to turn the audience against Birling, the main capitalist of the family.

At this early point in the play the audience have probably already begun to feel this hatred because of Birling’s snobbish and blatantly incorrect opening speeches. Although Birling was not to know what he was predicting for the future would turn out to be wrong, Priestley made him sound ignorant through the technique of dramatic irony by using his knowledge of the past to make the audience resent Birling. The audience knew what really happened; making what Birling said sound stupid, due to it being so wrong, “The Germans don’t want war.” (p6) The play was set before the First World War, but was being viewed after it. This made Birling incorrect about the war, which happened five years after setting of the play, he was also incorrect about the “unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable” Titanic, which we all know was struck by an iceberg and sank. Also Birling does not repent about Eva’s death, therefore Priestly was in the process of turning the audience against Birling, but more importantly turning them against capitalists. Other capitalists that would have been difficult to convince to change their ways would have been the other older members of the family.

Gerald, with older members of the family, did not repent at the end of the play, but rejoiced when receiving the news that Eva had apparently not died. Gerald had been involved with Eva, or Daisy, as he knew her. He had conducted an affair with her. From the way he terminated the relationship when he desired, showed that he did not really care for her, he “didn’t feel about her as she felt about me.” (p38) Mrs Birling was also grateful of the news that she was not to blame for Eva’s death, disregarding the fact of her disgraceful behaviour, which had recently been proved to her. These points that had been made by Priestley were done in such a way to form more resent towards capitalists. The younger members of the family, Eric and Sheila, are supposed to be liked by the audience, and therefore are portrayed in a different way by Priestley to create hope and an example of the future. Priestley moves onto highlighting how socialism is good for people by using Sheila, the person he interrogates second, to show that there can be optimism for the future.

The Inspector questions Sheila, who reacts with a dramatic effect once she discovered her involvement. After looking at the picture, the stages directions are,

“She looks at it closely, recognizes it with a little cry,

gives a half-stifled sob, and then runs out.” (p21)

Sheila feels extremely guilty about her involvement with Eva’s death and is quick to realise it. She got Eva sacked from her first stable job after losing her job at the Birling business just because of her “furious temper”. Priestley uses the younger generation to present hope, hope in the face of capitalism and hope to change this capitalism community into his idealistic socialist community. By showing Sheila repenting, Priestley demonstrates that the future generation can be changed to act upon the socialist views because young ones, “They’re more impressionable.” (p30)

Eric, as one of the ‘young ones’ was also affected by the flaws in himself that had been presented to him. By making him regret his actions, Priestley shows that socialism is a way for him to change. At this point in the play, it probably would have been Priestley’s aim to have the audience pitying the children, the possible socialists, and hating the elder members of the family, the capitalists. Whether or not Priestley convinces any member of the audience is dependant on their own views, but his aims were clear and it was obvious to me that he felt strongly about the community and its well being.

When the Inspector first entered the Birling house as a middle class, working man, Mr. Birling looked down on him as a person of the lower class. Birling felt he was above the Inspector, he tried to intimidate him by trying to pull ranks on him by questioning if he got on well “with our Chief Constable, Cornel Roberts?” (p16) Although Birling did this, the Inspector was not intimidated and therefore kept a high status in the eyes of the audience.

Priestley included many factors about the Inspector, to make him seem mysterious to the audience to the audience, he created the name “Goole. G. double O – L – E.” which could plant the idea of the Inspector being a ghoul due to the very similar spelling. Priestley wrote it like this to begin ideas in the minds of audiences, only to cover up his need for a way to convey his point views.

Priestley had wanted to use this play to convey his want of a socialist society, and used the Inspector as his voice throughout. The Inspector says, “We don’t live alone. We are members of one body – We are responsible for each other.” (p56) Priestley had been trying to express all the way throughout the play, this is the closest to saying that he wanted the community to change towards socialism. I believe that he conveyed a very good argument for changing lifestyles, and he supported it with his plot, but it is not very likely that he would have changed anybody in their views. The twists in the plot and unsuspected ending were very though provoking, Priestley wrote these very well and that only made his argument more convincing to the audience. Throughout history there has always been different classes, because if people work harder than others, surely they should be rewarded with more. Over the years, life has come closer to how Priestley had wanted it, there are still classes, and everybody is not equal, but the divides are faint and hardly every recognised in polite society.

Words ~ 1684