What reaction/s does Priestley intend the audience to have to the content of the play? How does he set about achieving them? Do you think he is successful in achieving his intentions?
Hannah Jones 10G
English Coursework: 'An Inspector Calls'
What reaction/s does Priestley intend the audience to have to the content of the play? How does he set about achieving them? Do you think he is successful in achieving his intentions?
The play 'An Inspector Calls' was written by J. B. Priestley in 1945. However, it is set in 1912; the Edwardian era, in which conservative forces continually portrayed the working classes as a threat to capitalism, and capitalists such as Arthur Birling, who is the archetype of a wealthy industrialist. Due to this, the reactionary government resisted making any reforms to help the working classes, many of whom were, according to a contemporary account, 'underfed, under-housed and insufficiently clothed... their health is undermined'. Tax records of 1911-1913 show that 87 percent of Britain's total personal wealth was concentrated among 5 percent of the population; thus, as one historian put it, 'Class differences were never so acutely felt as by the Edwardians'.
1945, contrastingly, was a time of great optimism for a 'brave new world' and of a desire not to repeat the mistakes of the past - since 1914 there had been two world wars and a terrible Depression. Social barriers had been blurred by the wars; everyone was forced to pull together and support their country. By setting the play in 1912 Priestley is reminding a 1945 audience of an era long gone, that should never be returned to. The strong socialist message of the play ('We don't live alone. We are members of one body. We are responsible for each other', says the eponymous Inspector) is Priestley's way of conveying his support for socialist principles; they were the way forward, towards a 'brave new world' in 1945.
The play begins with a seemingly normal scene from Brumley, a fictional industrial city, in 1912: an upper-middle-class family, the Birlings, are celebrating their daughter Sheila's engagement to the wealthy Gerald Croft. However, there are several hints of unease: Mrs. Birling, 'her husband's social superior' (Priestley's stage directions) reproaches Mr. Birling after he slips up by complimenting his own food. This emphasises Mrs. Birling's regard for upper-class rigid formality, her slight discomfort and embarrassment at being married to a man of a lower social status than she was, and thus her coldness and snobbishness as a person. Priestly intends the audience to obtain hints as to what will happen as the play progresses by Sheila, 'half serious, half playful', teasing Gerald about 'all last summer, when you never came near me', and Birling's treatment of his son, Eric, which shows his disappointment and irritation at him: 'Just let me finish, Eric. You've a lot to learn yet'.
While Mrs. Birling alienates an audience from a society with blurred class distinctions by her upper-class coldness, Mr. Birling does this in a more obvious way. Priestley achieves this by having him make long speeches, including comments such as, 'you'll hear some people say that war's inevitable... fiddlesticks!' (this would be particularly ironic to a 1945 audience; perhaps war had been inevitable to cause a shift in the emphasis of society, away from conservative capitalists and towards ordinary working people), 'the Titanic... unsinkable' (the Titanic, which sank, was a symbol of opulence and of belief in the greatness of man, much like Mr. Birling), 'the way some of these cranks talk and write now, you'd think everybody has to look after everybody else' (from 1945 and beyond it would have seemed palpable that human beings have some responsibility for their actions towards each other). At this stage the audience feels superior to Mr. Birling; the events he dismisses are easily recognisable, and the dramatic irony used displays him in an injudicious light. It is also easier to criticise a previous era.
Eerily, just as Mr. Birling finishes his long speech, 'we hear the sharp ring of a front door bell'. This is the Inspector. At first he seems like a typical inspector; he is polite yet frank, straightforward and purposeful, which arouses interest in the audience: what information has he come to pick up? The Inspector changes the mood of the play from the start: the stage directions require the lighting to be 'pink and intimate until the Inspector arrives, and then it should be brighter and harder'. This insinuates that the Birlings are no longer in their safe, ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Eerily, just as Mr. Birling finishes his long speech, 'we hear the sharp ring of a front door bell'. This is the Inspector. At first he seems like a typical inspector; he is polite yet frank, straightforward and purposeful, which arouses interest in the audience: what information has he come to pick up? The Inspector changes the mood of the play from the start: the stage directions require the lighting to be 'pink and intimate until the Inspector arrives, and then it should be brighter and harder'. This insinuates that the Birlings are no longer in their safe, closed-up, cosy home, but are 'seeing the light' and being exposed to the real world. The Inspector himself 'creates at once an impression of massiveness and solidity' - the sense of omniscience about him suggests that he is the voice that can never be wrong; the voice of morality, and of the silent, oppressed masses. He 'has a disconcerting habit of looking hard at the person he addresses before actually speaking' - he does not hurry, in order to give the Birlings (and audience) time to examine their consciences.
Birling is shown to be not only pompous and arrogant, but also selfish and greedy when he states that 'they [the workers in his factory including Eva Smith, who the Inspector says has committed suicide that night] were averaging about twenty-two and six... they wanted the rates raised... I refused, of course.' He refuses to pay his workers more than 'is paid generally in our industry' because he is working for 'lower costs and higher prices'. It is ironic that he uses these terms, because the audience infers that 'lower costs' (for the ruling class) and 'higher prices' (for the working class) is not merely referring to money, and ultimately this attitude will contribute towards a depression, with too many people earning too little. He also attempts to treat the Inspector as if he is simply someone of a lower social status than his that can be ordered around; 'Perhaps I ought to warn you that [Chief Constable Colonel Roberts] is an old friend of mine', suggests that he is trying to put the Inspector 'in his place' and make him defer to them.
The Inspector then interrogates Sheila Birling, who is instantly horrified at the news of Eva Smith's death. The Inspector makes an impression on Sheila very easily; 'But these girls aren't cheap labour - they're people.', she cries. Sheila 'went to the manager at Milwards [the clothes shop where Eva was working] and I told him that if they didn't get rid of that girl, I'd never go near the place again... I caught sight of her smiling at the assistant, and I was furious with her.' Although Sheila's action - having Eva Smith turned out of her job because she was jealous of her attractiveness - was devastating to Eva, Sheila instantly repents for it and makes no attempt to defend herself. The audience have more sympathy with her because of her honesty and contrition; we have all done things that we are ashamed of.
After Sheila finds out about her part in Eva's demise, she becomes the Inspector's accomplice, helping to extract the truth from the remaining members of her family, and voicing many points in the minds of the audience: 'You mustn't try to build up a wall between us and that girl. If you do, then the Inspector will just break it down'; 'Go on, Gerald. Don't mind mother'; 'But don't you see - '. It could be argued that Sheila is not only the voice of the audience, but also the voice of humanity. She has made a grave mistake, and is imperfect, but is ashamed of this, and learns - quite strikingly - from it.
We as an audience have mixed reactions to Gerald, who kept Eva Smith as his mistress. There are elements of positive and negative, old and young, about him. He is polite and respectful to Mr. Birling, not asserting his class; for example, he 'doesn't pretend to know much about port'. He is kind and romantic towards Sheila; he wants to 'make her as happy as she deserves to be' (This is ambiguous: how much happiness does Sheila 'deserve'?). He also helps Eva/Daisy, in giving her accommodation and money for a while. However, like Mr. Birling, he has no remorse about exploiting the workers in his factory. 'I know we'd have done the same thing', he says when it is revealed that Mr. Birling sacked Eva Smith for wanting a pay rise. It could also be argued that he exploits Eva/Daisy. From the start, he clearly knew he would not marry a working class girl and that nothing would come of it.
By now, the audience realise that all the characters will be implicated in the death of Eva Smith. This creates excitement among the audience and tension among the characters at who will be implicated next, especially as the events of Eva's life are revealed in a chronological order (with the exception of Mrs. Birling, who is the last person to have affected Eva but the second to last to be questioned) and there is no release of pressure due to a scene change or omission of time.
Mrs. Birling, a member of the Brumley Women's Charity Organization (there is no evidence to suggest Mrs. Birling is a kind person and wants to help the poor, so we must assume this is because this is expected of a woman of her social standing), refused the pregnant Eva Smith help because of the 'gross impertinence' of Eva calling herself 'Mrs. Birling' (the reason for which is later revealed) and because 'she was claiming elaborate fine feelings and scruples that were simply absurd in a girl in her position'. The word 'absurd' is ironic because principles, especially in the face of adversity, are usually seen to be admirable. This suggests that Mrs. Birling has a somewhat perverse sense of morals herself.
The description of the father of Eva's baby as 'silly and wild and drinking too much', along with the fact that Eric is the only member of the family left to be interrogated, leave the audience (and Sheila) in little doubt as to who the father of Eva's child is. Priestley intends the audience to regard Mrs. Birling as hypocritical and ignorant. He achieves this by two ironies: firstly, Mrs. Birling's view regarding 'fine feelings and scruples', and secondly, she insists that the father of Eva's baby is 'entirely responsible' and should be 'compelled to marry her' and 'dealt with very severely'. Yet when she finds out that this is her own son, she is more shocked that Eric stole money, and protests, 'No - Eric - please - I didn't know - I didn't understand'.
Act Two ends at a point of tension, when Eric walks in just as the family have realised what he has done. Not only has he got Eva pregnant, but he is also an alcoholic (or at least a heavy drinker). Ironically, the audience are more disgusted with his parents, for caring more about Eric's actions ruining the family's reputation than the damage they have done to Eva, and for accepting no blame for Eric's or Eva's situation ('you're not the kind of father a chap could go to when he's in trouble', says Eric). Like Sheila, Eric repents.
What follows is the Inspector's 'final speech', which could be considered the most powerful and poignant part of the play. It examines the moral and social consciences of the characters and of the audience. First, on a more personal level, the characters are reminded that 'each of you helped to kill her', and of their role in Eva's demise. The characters are very subdued; Sheila and Eric bitterly repent, while Mr. Birling misinterprets 'You made her pay a heavy price... And now she'll make you pay a heavier price still', as referring to money!
He then makes references to the 'millions and millions of Eva Smiths and John Smiths still left with us'. Here the relevance of the play's message outside the Birlings' dining room is emphasised. The Inspector is, in effect, throwing thoughts of 'minding your own business and looking after yourself and you own' back into the faces of the Mr. Birlings of this world. The audience know he is right; that men were taught a lesson in 'fire and blood and anguish' in the First and Second World Wars, and are still being taught it to this day, because they refused to be 'responsible for each other'. The Inspector always has a sense of omniscience about him - he knows before he asks what the Birlings have done - it is difficult to argue with a godlike figure.
Even after the Inspector's speech, and his departure, the older Birlings are still worried about 'public scandals' and Mr. Birling's chances for a knighthood being ruined. Sheila and Eric seem to have matured far beyond the level of their parents, and scorn them ('It's you two who are being childish - trying not to face the facts'), embodying the audience and Inspector, who have seen what the Birlings' attitude can lead to. Yet Mr. and Mrs. Birling are still the people 'in charge', which could symbolise the way that society is structured.
The family then start to wonder whether Inspector Goole was a genuine police inspector. Gerald comes back, and reveals that in fact he was not. They then find out that they may not all have been involved with the same girl, and no girl committed suicide that day and died in the Infirmary. Sheila and Eric retain their newly acquired sensitive minds, and insist that 'it frightens me the way you talk'. This embodies the way Mr. and Mrs. Birling's and Gerald's attitudes are frightening: they lead to 'fire and blood and anguish'.
To keep the content of the play fresh in the minds of the audience, a shocking end is required. Once again Mr. Birling is in the middle of a foolish comment ('the famous younger generation who know it all can't even take a joke') when 'the telephone rings sharply'. He is told that 'a girl has just died... And a police inspector is on his way here'. The ending is partly for the audience's satisfaction (Mr. and Mrs. Birling, two reviled characters, get what they deserve), but also so the audience will reconsider the events of the play (were they all involved with the same girl? What will happen the second time round? etc.) and thus its message.
'An Inspector Calls' can be seen as two things: a standard Detective Thriller, and a Morality play. Detective Thrillers usually have a purely entertaining function. 'An Inspector Calls' has elements of this because there is a mystery (why Eva killed herself) and the audience are left clues as to 'whodunnit' (e.g. 'all last summer when you never came near me'). However, since none of the characters have done anything illegal (except possibly Eric, who stole his father's money), the main function of the play is a moral one.
Morality Plays were popular in the Middle Ages. Abstract ideas and issues are given human form - such as, in this play the inspector, 'God' and Eva Smith, 'Everyman'. It could be argued that the other characters embody different facets of the bourgeoisie, or ruling class, or the Seven Deadly Sins. These are lust, avarice, envy, wrath, gluttony, sloth and pride. In early Morality Plays characters were actually named after the characters they embody, e.g. 'Lust'. 'An Inspector Calls' is subtler; the characters are not one-dimensional but can be identified with by the audience.
We never see Eva Smith; therefore we cannot pass judgement on her as an individual. All we are allowed to see is the way she is disenfranchised and exploited; so the only way we are able to view her is as the embodiment of the working classes, trampled on by the bourgeoisie and all its vices. The fact that all of the characters are highly symbolic enables us to view this not only as a play about the Birling family, but about the whole of society, and our own flaws.
It is due to this that the play is still relevant today. In my opinion, 'An Inspector Calls' will never cease to be relevant, challenging and controversial. There will always be Eva Smiths because there will always be Mr. Birlings: a relatively recent example of the 'a man has to look after himself and his own' viewpoint is ex-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, speaking in 1987: 'There is no such thing as society. There are individual women and men, and there are families.'