Throughout the play it becomes clear that the inspector isn’t all he’s made out to be, it could be possible that he is in fact a fraud impersonating an inspector which is what he leaves the family members thinking. The Inspector calls himself ‘Goole’ which could be a witticism on the word ‘Ghoul’ which is often used to describe ghostly beings. Towards the end of the play it becomes apparent that the Inspector was not actually a true inspector. However, Priestley doesn’t actually disclose who or what, the Inspector is, and perhaps Priestley’s aim was to leave this matter a complete mystery. This plan was to ensure his audience would carry on thinking about this aspect of the play and therefore have to think about the main subject socialism which is what he was desperate to do.
The Inspector’s intend in the play is to alter the audiences and the Birling families thoughts and opinions. One of the ways he does this is by questioning each one of the Birling’s in turn. The Inspector firsts interrogates Mr. Birling, asking him why he sacked Eva Smith from her job at his factory, simply for asking for more money. Birling was 'surprised' at being questioned, so it seems that what he says is usually accepted as correct. His surprise could also be because of exactly what the Inspector was questioning. Birling says that it is his 'duty to keep labor costs down' which indicates that he does not think of each worker as a person and cares a great deal about money. The fact that he did not recognize the name Eva Smith even though she was someone he dealt with personally and a worker who stood out, further shows that he does not think of his employees as people. To him they are nameless and have no individuality. Priestley has done this to make audience members realise that even if a person has a very minor job, or is poorer than most, they still deserve to be treated with respect.
The Inspector realises early on that Sheila’s and her fathers morals are very different as she points out that 'these girls aren't cheap labor - they're people.' When she says 'So I'm really responsible?' she demonstrates her capability to admit when she is wrong. The Inspector probably thinks more highly of her than Arthur because of this, he realises that she shares the same views as him when it comes to the way workers should be treated.
Once the line of questioning turns to Gerald, the Inspector is friendlier towards Sheila. The inspector understands that Sheila would want to hear the about Gerald’s affair with Eva Smith, or “Daisy Renton” so he ensures she stays by saying, ‘If she leaves now she’ll think she’s entirely to blame’. As Gerald is being questioned, Sheila seems to step into the role of the inspector, which she also does at the end of the end of the play after he leaves; this shows how alike her and his views are. The inspector doesn’t treat Gerald with fondness or contempt. He acknowledges that 'he at least had some affection for her and made her happy for a time.' By quizzing Gerald about his affair he makes it clear to the audience that everyone should thing about there actions, as all actions have consequences. This is one message that priestly wants the audience to consider.
Up until this point Mrs. Birling has not been present at one of the inspector’s questionings, so she is unaware of the inspector’s abruptness. She describes him as 'a trifle impertinent'. Like Arthur Birling, she seems to be apparent to receiving nothing but respect. This is because she is of a high-middle class. The Inspector correctly treats the characters with the same disregard as they gave Eva Smith. Mrs. Birling becomes increasingly annoyed at how the Inspector treats her. This is shown when the Inspector says, 'You're not telling me the truth', and she replies 'I beg your pardon!' She seems horrified by the way she reacts that somebody could speak in that way to a lady of her class. Her behavior shows how full of self-importance some people can be.
Mrs. Birling refuses to believe that she had any accountability for the death of Eva Smith, just like her husband. In an attempt to protect her family, she moves all the blame from them, and turns all of the blame onto the unidentified man: the father of Eva's child. She very gladly declares that the man should be 'dealt with very severely' and made to 'confess in public his responsibility,' oblivious to what most of the audience would have realised; that Eric was the father. This is another example of irony. She believes that the man must be someone who is working-class and has not been brought up properly because he was a drunk and guilty of theft. By doing this Priestley’s aim is to show that all classes of people should be treated the same, and lower class people shouldn’t be looked down on.
Each of the Birling’s and Gerald have done things to Eva that were wrong. Sheila and Eric however are actually regretful and seem to have learnt from their mistakes and immediately become more likeable and seem less at fault. The Birling parents represent the older people; perhaps Priestley is hinting that he believes older people are less likely to change their views, as they’re more set in their ways than younger generations. The Inspector implies that the Birling parents and Gerald Croft are the ones more at fault because their ideas about class and Capitalism do not change. Priestley and the Inspector think that 'Public men... have responsibilities as well as privileges' which suggests that Priestley thinks that those who forget their responsibilities also cause social problems.
The Inspector says in his final speech 'We are responsible for each other.... if men will not learn that lesson, then they will be taught in fire and blood and anguish.' This is an implication that he is criticising those who do not learn, not those who have acted that way in the past.
The inspectors final speech is a very powerful one, during which he conveys his own and Priestly ideas that 'We are responsible for each other’ for the final time. His speech completely contracts with the speech of the plays fool, Mr. Birling who thinks 'a man has to mind his own business and look after himself and his own.' This shows how Priestly wants to portray the Capitalists theory on life, Priestly also entered the inspector during
Mr. Birling’s as if to show him wrong. During the final speech Priestly makes the Inspector seem even more supernatural by referring to the forthcoming war, 'We are members of one body.... then they will be taught in fire and blood and anguish.’ Priestly makes the war seem to the audience asif it was sent as punishment for people not working together and at the same time force them to do so. To extent Priestly was correct in his belief as the war did break down barriers of class within the country and brought people closer together. I also believe that the Priestly used the idea of war to put across his theory was because it was a major issue at that time, and people were still suffering the consequences of it. Priestly also seems to be asking “What kind of society are we fighting to save?”
The final scene of the play is one of which the Birling’s receive a telephone call from the police stating ‘a girl has just died.... after swallowing some disinfectant' and a real inspector would be arriving shortly to investigate them. This is an unexpected twist. The impostor inspector was there to punish them on a moral level which he managed to succeed in doing with two of the party, Eric and Sheila yet not with the others. As Mr. and Mrs. Birling and Gerald were all afraid of a public scandal no doubt that is what the real inspector will provide although as the story has ended we will not find out. I believed that without the twist at the end the play would not have the same effect as Mr. and Mrs. Birling and Gerald would have avoided punishment. The inspector’s role in the play is to teach and provide a channel for Priestly to present his own messages, in respect to the story he did this by informing the Birling household what they had caused a girl to do due to their actions. In regards of the whole society, he did this by voicing Priestley's opinions that we cannot live together peacefully if we do not work together.
