There are several aspects of society that Priestley criticises, one of them being the greed that can come with capitalism. Mr Birling is an especially greedy capitalist whose motto is, “Lower costs, higher prices”. As the play begins, the Birling family is celebrating their wealth and an engagement. With the engagement Birling is celebrating the fact that “Crofts and Birlings” are working together for increased profit. In addition a focus of his conversation is “the interests of Capital” and increasing prosperity” but this will only come to the wealthy. Mr Birling’s point of view is that society is every man for himself. Priestley shows that this is the wrong viewpoint by having the Inspector arrive straight after Birling expresses his view. His connection to Eva Smith is that she used to work for him and she was sacked for being the ringleader of a strike to get higher wages. Mr Birling wouldn’t give her more money because he would lose profit, “They were averaging about twenty two and six, which was neither more nor less than is paid generally in out industry”. He paid no more than other companies and by referring to other companies, Priestley levels the criticism at all capitalists whose motivation is profit.
An additional aspect of criticism is the way that the upper class abuse their power to affect the working class. Mr Birling’s daughter Sheila abuses her power to get Eva sacked from her last steady job. She does this because she was jealous of Eva’s looks and was in a bad temper. Priestley implies that her mother wouldn’t let her get her own way. “It had been an idea of my own-mother had been against it, and so had the assistant-but I insisted”. At the time, Sheila didn’t think it was that important but regrets it after she finds out that Eva is dead. The Inspector says that she can’t change the past. “It’s too late, she’s dead.” It is vital that Sheila is not helped to feel better about the past if she is to change her attitude in the future.
Moreover, social class prejudices and distinction is greatly criticised in the character Mrs Birling. She comes into contact with Eva when she appealed for help to the Brumley Women’s Charity Organisation. Mrs Birling is prejudiced against Eva because she used the Birling name which she believed to be “gross impertinence”. The Inspector criticises her the most, “You’ve had children. You must have realised what she was feeling. And you slammed the door in her face.” She thinks Eva is inferior socially and morally, “As if a girl like that would ever refuse money!” Eva does have a moral code as she doesn’t take stolen money and wouldn’t marry the one who made her pregnant because he didn’t love her.
Furthermore, people with a lack of a moral code are strongly criticised. This is shown in Eric who does not seem to have a moral code although that point could be argued against. He coerced Eva into having sex with him and stole money which is his father’s main concern. However, Eric only stole the money to support Eva when she became pregnant. He lacks a moral code because neither his parents nor his education had given him a moral foundation to base his code on. His parents believe they are superior, a point Birling tries to impress on the Inspector: “Perhaps I ought to warn you that (the Chief Constable) is an old friend of mine.” They also assume that they don’t need any help morally. Eric knows that he has done wrong and that is why he drinks so much, to ease the pain. Due to his lack of a moral code, he makes Eva pregnant (following the chain of events his father started and his mother completes) and steals money to support her needs. She refuses the money and turns to Mrs Birling’s charity for help. She does have a moral code however as she doesn’t accept stolen money and wouldn’t marry Eric because he didn’t love her. The Inspector’s point is that Eric abused Eva and, “Just used her for the end of a drunken stupid evening, as if she were an animal, a thing, not a person.”
Before the Inspector’s exit, he leaves a warning which Mr and Mrs Birling ignore. They do not pay attention because due to the Inspector not existing, they believe there are no consequences to their actions and therefore can carry on behaving as we always have. “Why shouldn’t we?” They don’t accept that they have done something wrong. However, Sheila and Eric have listened and accept their misdeeds. They are impressionable and the point is that if behaviour doesn’t change, eventually there will be consequences and Priestley proves this with the phone ringing and the action of the play beginning again.
Using the theatrical device of the Inspector, Priestley delivers his criticisms. The Inspector arrives during Mr Birling’s speech about the higher class having no social responsibility for others. Before the Inspector arrives, Priestley has used dramatic irony to discredit Birling’s views, using the Titanic and the World Wars as examples when the audience know the bitter truth. So when Birling states his belief that community is “nonsense”, the audience’s poor opinion of Birling’s views are supported by the arrival of the Inspector who comes to challenge his views. He is introduced by Edna, the only working class in the household and the stage directions which emphasise his arrival, “The Inspector creates at once an impression of massiveness, solidity and purposefulness.” Priestley’s criticisms are delivered in the character of the Inspector because as an Inspector, he has to authority to inspect the Birling family. It suggests that Birling’s acts were criminal. The language used to describe Eva’s death is very gruesome and graphic, “She’d been taken there this afternoon because she’d swallowed a lot of strong disinfectant. Burnt her inside out. She was in great agony”, to show the consequences are unavoidable.
Mr Birling is inspected by the Inspector in several ways which emphasises that Birling had done wrong. He helps Mr Birling to recognise Eva with a photo, names her as an individual and presents the consequences so Birling can see what he has done. Birling objects to it being his fault but is contradicted by the Inspector. “I can’t agree with you there. Because what has happened to her then may have determined what happened to her afterwards. A chain of events.” The Inspector focuses on Birling’s motives which surprises him as the Inspector asks, “Why?”. Birling has never had to explain himself or reflect on the consequences of his actions.
The Inspector is more critical of the older Birlings such as Mr and Mrs Birling and straight to the point, “She was here, alone, friendless, almost penniless, desperate. You’ve had children. You must have known what she was feeling. And you slammed the door in her face.”. He is forceful with Sheila and Eric because they are younger, more impressionable and can change their attitude, “Just used her for the end of a drunken evening, as if she were an animal, a thing, not a person. No, you won’t forget.” In the Inspector’s final speech before he makes his exit he says, “And the time will soon come when, if men will not learn that lesson, they will be taught it in fire and blood and anguish.”, which carries a biblical tone emphasising the seriousness of the consequences of their actions and references the First and Second World Wars. The speech summarises all of Priestley’s criticisms and demands change because they can and they must change. There is a lot of social responsibility to uphold in society in general. If they didn’t learn that lesson now, there would be a heavy price to pay.
In the final act, they find out the Inspector wasn’t what he claimed to be and the Birlings automatically think there are no consequences. Sheila and Eric still want to change their ways. “He inspected us alright” and “Whoever that chap was, the fact remains I did what I did.” Once we realise that Mr and Mrs Birling will not change their ways, the action of the play begins again. This is to show if attitudes aren’t changed, history will repeat itself.
Overall, my opinion is that Priestley has been very successful in conveying his criticisms by using the Inspector. It is a unique way of expressing his judgement and it works effectively. Relevance to today’s society is small, although I can see the similarities between the setting of ‘An Inspector Calls’ and modern times. Despite living in a socialist society, a few fragments and attitudes of Conservative politics remain.
