Priestly chose a wide range of ways that the Birling family affected Eva Smith, so that the audience could see how many different characters could be affecting someone’s life forever without their even realising it. These actions are such different scenarios for this encounter, but each has its own significance
The behaviour of each family member was under severe scrutiny by the inspector and the individual’s actions were all up for judgement. Sheila for one had her happiness destroyed as well as her faith in her family. Each individual was not only under scrutiny by the inspector but by there family as well. There individual behaviours have an affect on Eva in different ways. Mr. Birling and Sheila left her without any form of occupation or income. Eric and Gerald both got involved with her emotionally and Eric left her pregnant whilst Gerald left her heartbroken. Mrs Birling, at the height of social responsibility, leaves her without a home, support, or any from of income, therefore by now she has no one to turn to and in her own opinion no other options but suicide.
The Birling plot is superficial and Priestly has merely used this to alert others and get across his points about social responsibility. The inspector is only on one level, he can be seen as an inspector or on another level their own conscience to help make the family admit they are not perfect and do not think about the consequences of there own actions when interacting with others.
Once the Inspector leaves the house and the Birlings find out he was not a registered inspector, they assume because their reputation has suddenly been taken back to it original state that there is absolutely nothing to worry about. But Eric and Sheila are not so eager to forget and find their parents attitude amazing as well as become concerned that they have not learned anything from this episode.
By revealing the involvement of the several characters the theme that social responsibility should not be abused is reinforced.
All other factors such as the inspector and Eva Smith can be forgotten but one fact remains and that is that all of them have been inconsiderate and selfish in their treatment of Eva Smith. Which could easily have resulted how the inspector described, a death by drinking disinfectant on the way to the infirmary.
So, priestly explores the issue of social responsibility using this theme and idea, which is reinforced, by the use of several characters under different circumstances.
This play was written in 1945 within a week of world war two ending but set in the year of 1912. This was Priestly’s way of expressing a sense of urgency which he thought necessary to pass on to society so that they would not forget what had just transpired and take heed. It is his way of expressing his socialist views.
To explore the issues of social responsibility within this play, Priestly has thought about the plot structure and how he has chosen to set out his dialogue. It is clearly divided into three acts.
The first act is the initiation of the play. Its opens and immediately we are told who the characters are, the Birlings, where they are, in a large suburban house, and what they are doing, celebrating the engagement of Sheila Birling to Gerald Croft ‘Gerald I am going to tell you frankly, without any pretences that your engagement to Sheila means an awful lot to me.’
We instantly establish that this is a seemingly perfect family that have a good and stable life. There is nothing here to warn us of the shock of the inspectors visit.
In this first act we are soon informed a long with the Birlings and Gerald Croft that a young girl, named Eva Smith has committed suicide, by an inspector who arrives shortly after Mr.Birling issues advice to his children and son-in-law to be. Our attention is being focussed in on the Birlings and it also gets us thinking about how they both have affected someone so badly. So it is here that we begin to think about how they both should have been more socially responsible. There is nothing to allow the audience to be distracted from the central theme so there is n
o sub-plot; it is a very compact structure.
The act closes with Sheila and Gerald discussing intensely the reason for why Gerald looked so guilty when the name ‘Eva Smith was mentioned’ this broadens our ideas into thinking how Gerald may have been involved. It ends with the inspector’s arrival and the solitary word ‘Well?’
Act two is the development of the plot, it too is structured and still situated in the same place and the action is continuous. This helps Priestly explore social responsibility further the attention is being focussed on the main ideas within the play, which are that of how each member at this point could all be implicated into the death of Eva Smith. The reason for the break in between act one and two also is another means of trying to get the audience to really think about what they already know try to assimilate. They then are introduced back into the play when the inspector questions Gerald. Gerald’s affair is discovered, which again shows another way that social responsibility has been explored. He then moves on to Mrs Birling, which again shows how he is developing the plot further. Mrs Birling’s attempts to shift blame for the girls suicide leads her to blame the father of the unborn child. Sheila here tries desperately hard to stop her mother from digging herself into a hole that the inspector will not allow her to climb back out of. This is how act two is closed, with Sheila saying ‘Mother- I begged you and begged you to stop’ Now it becomes clear that Eric has been involved with Eva as well and before act three begins the audience is able to reflect on the way that social responsibilities have been explored and addressed. The dramatic entrance of Eric puts everything into perspective as Mrs Birling spent a great deal of time blaming the father, which appears as though it could have been her own son.
So the conclusion begins, which is contained within act three. With the departure of the inspector it would appear that what follows would be something of an anti-climax as the inspectors identity is put into doubt by a series of observations made by the Birlings and Gerald, ‘we hardly ever told him something he didn’t already know’ Even the existence of Eva is called into question! So the inspector and Eva become less important to the audience but it remains that all of them were abusing their social responsibility. The final denouement, the phone call announcing that a police officer is on his way to ask some questions about a girl that has just died on her way to the infirmary is sure to leave the audience in a real state of shock. The way this un-clear ending was structured helped Priestly to explore social responsibility at another level. Leaving his audience attentive.
The audience’s attention was engaged by the flow of tension throughout this structural framework, this increases the impact of the underlying moral issues of social responsibility.
The tension in this play begins to rise as soon as the inspector arrives. It is then on the increase throughout all the interrogations, which is increasing the impact of the way in which they all abuse their social responsibility. In the area when the inspector arrives into the room as Gerald and Sheila are discussing why he recognises the name Eva Smith, the inspector ends the scene with a simple question ‘why?’ Tension is on the increase, firstly Gerald’s affair is unveiled and the scandal it would cause and Sheila a long with the audience begin to realise that they are all implicated in some way. ‘He is giving us a rope so that we’ll hang ourselves’ When Mrs Birling does shift the blame onto the father of the unborn child, the tension is heightened at this point by the dramatic entrance of Eric. All of these interrogations are emphasising social responsibility and so this use of tension in the play seems very important for Priestly to explore his moral issues. The inspector’s final speech that to me appears as a conclusion to this storyline, addresses most of the aspects that Priestly has tried to portray through the course of the play. ‘ We don’t live alone. We are members of one body’ also he uses short and quick sentences which have an impact on the Birlings. Priestly seems to use the inspectors speech as a way to get his socialist views across to the public.
As soon as the inspector exits the tension begins to dramatically decrease. They each ask themselves questions such as ‘does such an inspector exist?’ and whether or not they were all involved with the same girl. Making themselves look acceptable to the public obsessed Mr and Mrs Birling, worrying only about how they would be known after this all ‘came out’. On the other hand Sheila looked at it as a lesson well learnt. However the tension remains to some extent as the two generations confirm the differences as suggested by the inspector. The tension shoots up when that crucial phone call is made to the Birlings.
The limited setting and physical action within the plot again reinforces the significance of the ideas upon which the superficial storyline is based. This is because there is nothing else to draw your attention away from the meaning of the play, which is to make the upper-middle-class people more aware of the actions, and choices that they make, and the way that they are able to affect other people’s lives. There is certainly a lack of physical action within this play, but it is like that for a purpose. It helps Priestly explore social responsibility because it is mostly intense interrogation and discussions which although appear as though they will not keep the audiences attention, actually help you to focus in on the dialogue rather than thinking about their movement.
By choosing to leave the ending of the plot somewhat obscure Priestly is able to focus the audience in on the underlying themes rather than the surface plot. So, they realise when the inspector leaves that they had hardly told him anything that he did not already know. Gerald finds out that he was not a registered inspector down at the local police force, so therefore another unexplainable factor. Bought to their attention now is the fact that they may not have all been looking at the same photograph, so they could have all affected different people and not just one unfortunate girl. All of these points are never explained at the ending; there is not a right or wrong answer for whom the inspector was and how he appeared to know so much about the Birling family. The audience should go away with this in their minds, it is not whether the girl existed or who the inspector was but the moral issue to be learnt here was that they all managed to affect somebody’s life in a negative way. The surface plot of the Birlings should become less significant.
By using this very un-clear ending Priestly is able to focus on and explore social responsibility.
Through his characters in this play, Priestly is able to explore the issues of social responsibility. He does this by choosing to use a family, this helps him to be able to cover many different ways in which various people are implicated in different contexts and represent how everyday behaviour and situations can impact on other people’s lives.
Mr Birling represents those who face the dilemma of businesses out to make a profit yet needing to handle responsibility that goes with being an employer of real people. As an employer of Eva Smith Mr.Birling abused his position of power when he fired her from his business. His first priority is to make money ‘it is my duty to keep labour costs down’. He strongly believes that ‘a man has to make his own way’ and does not care who he crushes in the process, not considering the harm he may do as a result of this sort of attitude. He certainly seems like a hardheaded businessman. He is a magistrate and former mayor; the talk of knighthood shows his confidence in his self. But deep down he knows he is not the social equal of his wife, and also that Gerald’s mother is not that pleased about the engagement of her son to a Birling, because she believes them to be of lower status than the Crofts socially. As he becomes a little in secure he does in fact attempt to threaten the inspector with talk of his friendship with the chief constable. All these pieces of personality are put together to epitomise the businessman of that time.
He also could represent Priestly’s hatred of businessmen who are only interested in making money. He will never alter his ways and it is left to the younger generation to learn from their mistakes. Therefore he epitomises those who will not recognise their own social responsibility that comes with social status. This is emphasized at the end when Gerald and Sheila are willing to change but their parents are far more worried about the family name being under threat. So, his use for this character is to portray the way that businessman can become self-orientated and obsessed in making money, this helps him to explore social responsibility within this type of person, that many in the audience will be able to relate to.
The use of the character Sheila, is a good example of the insensitivity of youth, she also exemplifies the abuse of social status, as this is the way that she had an effect on Eva Smith. In the stage directions Sheila is described as ‘a pretty girl in her early twenties, very pleased with life and rather excited.’ Priestly is deliberately trying to portray her as perhaps dizzy or unable to make her own decisions. When the inspector arrives Sheila is not in the room, as soon as she does enter she is drawn into the situation asking many different questions, which her father isn’t pleased about. Sheila is shocked after the news of the death of the girl is finally explained ‘How horrible – was it an accident’. But although she seems genuinely distressed by this news, the audience have to think hard about her as she makes a comment that suggests she seems to be thinking about herself again ‘ I can’t stop thinking about this girl- destroying herself so horribly- and I’ve been so happy tonight. Oh I wish you hadn’t told me’ she definitely appears a very selfish individual after she makes this statement.
The reformation of Sheila begins when she starts to think of Eva as an individual and not as cheap labour. On recognising the photo that the inspector shows to her, she is so horrified by her own actions in Milwards that she has to leave the room. On returning back she admits her jealousy of Eva’s good looks and is ready to take the blame maturely.
The use of this character is another way that Priestly is able to explore social responsibility, unlike the way he uses her father, this time he shows that people are able to change. The actual effects of Sheila’s actions are as bad as that of her fathers because they both leave Eva with no income. The only difference is that Sheila is not willing to forget her mistakes whereas Mr.Birling is. The visit of the inspector leaves her traumatised and she wants to make amends, prank or not. These are two different people having the same effect on one person.
The character of Gerald helps Priestly explore social issues by showing how playing with Eva’s emotions by entering into a romantic relationship can also be abusing social responsibility because relationships themselves carry responsibility, which is increased when one of the people involved is in a very vulnerable position and also of lower class. He gave her unrealistic hopes. But his first intentions were decent, but eventually he admits that the feelings she had for him were stronger than those he felt back. When he finally leaves her he feels immense guilt as he can only offer her temporary help and support. The feeling that I think Priestly wants us to have is that of sympathy for Gerald because ‘Daisy told me she’d been happier than she’d ever been before.’
Although he appears to have a deep feel of regret towards the way he used Eva and his actions where indisputable, his response to the inspector’s message does not have the same degree of depth that Sheila shows. It is worth to keep in mind that when the inspector leaves, to distract everyone from his or her own implication Gerald is the first to inquire into whether this man was an impostor.
Gerald’s views are similar to those of Mr.Birlings; he shows support to him when Mr.Birling tries to justify his reasons for sacking Eva.
Mrs Birling is someone who is dedicated to helping women; she has therefore put herself in his position of social responsibility. She appears ignorant and prejudice throughout the course of the play. She makes snobbish remarks such as’ a girl of that sort’ and believing that she has absolutely no part in all of this makes snide comments about the way her family attempt to settle the matter of Eva’s death.
She remains determined that Eva’s death could be, in any way shape or form, her fault. In act II she even refuses to recognise a photo shown to her by the inspector ‘no, why should I?’ After being put under severe pressure by the Inspector, Mrs.Birling finally admits her disregard and neglect for the pregnant girl, yet still manages to force the blame onto the unborn child’s father ‘if anyone’s to blame it’s the young man’ unbeknownst to her that this ‘young man’ that she piles the blame onto will reveal to be her own son. The audience are now able to see that the chain of events could have easily resulted in the Eva Smith’s suicide. Her aim is to always reflect the image of respectability and this is what she puts before her responsibility as a person to help others that come to her charity.
Priestly uses this character because she has a strong personality and will have an immediate reaction on the audience or reader of this play, it helps him to explore how prejudice some people can be after the use of their name or something else that is equally petty is miss- used!
Eric’s response to the tragedy is similar to that of Sheila, his immediate reaction seems to be ‘Oh, God’ they both show sympathy for the way she was sacked by their father.
But near to the end of the book, whilst some people have already figured out that Eric is the father of Eva’s unborn baby, we are told of his abuse of social status and male superiority. He exemplifies irresponsibility whilst under the influence of alcohol takes advantage of Eva’s vulnerability. Unlike Gerald, Eric does offer marriage to Eva, but as she is aware that he does not love her she refuses. Eric does give her money for support but when Eva realises it was stolen from his father, she will not accept any more from him.
I think that Priestly made the most responsible people for the death of Eva Smith, the older generation. This may have been because they are generally speaking more set in their ways unlike people such as Eric and Sheila. Ultimately I think that Priestly used each of the characters to portray a different part of society and personified them to the death of Eva Smith.
I believe that Priestly made the character of Mr.Birling hold the most social and moral responsibilities. His unwillingness to accept these shows his insolence.
Priestly uses dramatic qualities to help the audience relate to and understand social responsibility. One way that he chooses to use dramatic qualities is by making a contrast between the families situation and atmosphere at the beginning and the end. At the start of the play, the family portray a seemingly perfect and happy family. Sheila is looking forward to her future with Gerald, she is ‘very pleased with life’ the others equally share her happiness and everything is well. The atmosphere at this part of the story is very positive and everyone is celebrating. Yet all of them have a hidden shame that is about to unfold.
The ending of this story has a completely different situation, their lives seem to have been destroyed along with the faith in certain family members. Sheila has broken up with Gerald due to the recent discovery of his affair and whilst some people, namely Mr and Mrs Birling are left in denial, the younger generation are traumatised and emotional. Even Eric admits to his father his true thoughts ‘you are not a man a son can go to’ leaving even more upset within the family. The atmosphere is that of confusion as to whom the inspector actually was, denial, anger and the future seems bleak.
This contrast explores the social issues as well as adding interest that is very important.
The ‘tragic’ feel imbued by the sense of a fall from power of the perfect middle-class family was another dramatic quality. Eva acted as though because of there status that she trusted them, thinking that they were the sort of people that would help her. But all of them failed and in the process lost the superiority they thought they possessed over her. It turns out that none of them did have this, as they could not help her when she needed it most. At they end they realise that nothing can really ever be the same. Priestly has obviously chosen this to be of importance so that the audience of the time could see just how easy it is to loose all your respect as a person with a high social status, when you act so cruelly towards someone who is classed lower than yourself.
The subject itself ‘a death by suicide’ is immediately something of interest to a person viewing or reading this play. As soon as the inspector tells us of this event we are instantly intrigued and desperate to hear more, this is the effect that deaths and suicides have on people. By using this type of story line Priestly can keep his audience interested whilst still managing to explore his social issues. The subject also indicates to the audience the way that the victim, in this case Eva, felt. It shows the shame that she experienced through the societies disapproval of her situation. It also gives the audience an insight into how they influence people of that class, so therefore should be more responsible in their actions. This disapproval is shown with Mrs.Birling’s reaction when Eva Smith pleads for help from her committee. It is blatantly obvious that she is horrified by the situation Eva has got herself into. Priestly makes us think that Mrs.Birling assumes that the father would also be of this lower class. I can justify this when she begins to lecture the inspector who is interrogating her, “I blame the young man who was the father of the unborn child.” Here I think she is suggesting that the father must have been of the same class, otherwise would not have got this young girl into such a bad situation. But of course this is not necessarily the case.
The mystery element helps to add curiosity to the play therefore keeping the audience attentive. It plays a very strong part in Priestly trying to get the audience to realise their social responsibilities. I say this because, towards the end of the story the issue becomes not whether they all affected the same girl, or whether the name ‘inspector Goole’ actually existed. But through all this mystery these points become irrelevant and emphasize the fact that the real issue is all of these people have affected someone’s life in such a negative way.
The mysteries begin after the inspector leaves the family home. This is when each person feels at the most tension that they have all felt through the play. It is as if after he leaves they need something to distract them from the thought of being irresponsible in their actions. So they begin to ask themselves questions such as – was he a real inspector? And – Did he show us all the same photo? This brings the tension down. The thought of them being tricked by a hoax makes them concentrate on this matter instead of the thought of how terrible the death of Eva is and the way that they all acted towards her.
The climatic pattern of action is a very important dramatic quality of this play. It is a combination of the building up of tension starting from the entrance of the Inspector and the way he asks questions and interrogates each member of the family. The way in which he does question the family has a distinctive style it is as though he is putting ideas into there heads or suggesting the way that they might have affected her ‘in fact in a kind of way you might be said to have been jealous of her’ here he is slowly getting Sheila to admit that she did feel jealous of Eva. He appears very sly throughout the play, this helps us build a picture of his character in our minds “ Sheila- But mother do stop before its too late- Mrs.Birling- if you mean that the inspector will take offence- Inspector – No no I never take offence”
Here he wishes for Mrs.Birling to carry on because he knows that she is digging herself in to a deep hole that she will not be able to get back out of, this is exactly the position that the inspector wants to get her into. As she gets herself into this position the tension among those on stage does build up dramatically and this has an affect on the audience, it makes them aware of how she treated the girl badly and refused to take the blame. They should therefore think afterwards only negative thoughts about Mrs.Birling and of course the rest of the family and want to change their own ways of treating and respecting people of a lower class. This is exactly what I think J.B Priestly wanted the audience of the play to reflect on, after leaving the theatre.
As the play progresses, the inspector manages to make each person admit there wrong doing and tell him the story of how they were involved with Eva Smith. He never actually tells them much about Eva Smith, but it is clear to us that he does however know more than he is letting on. It is clear that right at the end of Act II he know that Eric was the father of Eva’s unborn child. “I am waiting” – Mrs.Birling – Waiting for what – Inspector – To do my duty” here we are hinted that he is waiting for Eric to return back to the house, so that he may ask him questions about the death of Eva, shortly afterward Mrs.Birling realises that what he is trying to tell he is that Eric may well be the father. This is confirmed after the inspector interrogates Eric and as he has done so in the last four cases, gets him to explain everything.
At the height of tension, created by the climatic pattern of action, the inspector does his final speech. He has for one of the first times in the play, managed to get the whole family into the same room. This speech brings together the meaning of the play focussing in on social responsibility, it appears very dramatic and emotional, therefore leaving the audience to really think about the strong words and phrases he has used such as ‘their hopes, their fears, their suffering and chance of happiness all intertwined with our life” not only does this powerful speech leave the characters subdued but any person who feels guilt about treating someone like this might also feel like the characters do.
The climatic pattern of action that J.B Priestly creates helps him to explore the issues of social responsibility by drawing the audience into the play and making them relate to the characters.
The mysterious quality enhanced through the dialogue is another dramatic quality that Priestly uses to help him explore these issues of responsibility. The inspector is one of the most mysterious parts of the play and his identity is questioned a lot at the end when the family do not know what to think, after Gerald uncovers more information.
But the mystery of him is also visible during the course of the play. I think this because he does not seem to inform the family of how much he exactly knows about this girl’s life from the beginning of his introduction to them. This adds drama because as an audience we are kept in suspense not knowing what will unfold next.
The dialogue indicates a mystery might develop when Sheila says to Gerald “yes except for all last summer when you hardly came near me” Gerald quickly replies to this comment explaining that he was “busy at the works” but the indication of some mysterious element is when Sheila says back to him “yes that’s what you say so”
These examples of mystery through the dialogue all help Priestly to explore the issues of social responsibility by keeping the audience attentive and binging them into the play.
J.B Priestly has used a combination of techniques to help him explore the issues of social responsibility in ‘An Inspector Calls’ All of them appear to have made the play interesting whilst still focussing in on the how people of an upper middle class status treat and respect those of the working class or with a lower status. He has used a catchy theme, structured his play well, chosen a range of characters and added dramatic qualities, all of which help him to explore the issues of social responsibility successfully within the play.
