Essays Flashcards
How sheila changes
Throughout Inspector Calls, Sheila is the character who changes the most. At the beginning of the play she is a young, naïve girl who is happy to be told what to think and do; by the end she is the only character who really takes responsibility for the death of Eva and is happy to tell her parents that she thinks they are wrong.
The stage directions describe her as being “very pleased with life” a phrase which reflects her luxurious upbringing. She’s also described as being “excited” an adjective that suggests she is looking forward to her life. In both these respects she could be viewed as being ignorant to the reality of what her luxury costs others, or how difficult the times ahead will be.
Sheila refers to her parents as “mummy” and “daddy,” nouns that are associated with young children and not young adults; she is also told off by her mother for squabbling with her brother, a fact that reinforces our vision of her as being infantilised by her parents. Sheila is then given a ring by her fiancé Gerald. “Is it the one you wanted me to have?” she asks him, a phrase that suggests she wasn’t really interested in what she wanted but only what Gerald wanted her to have. Throughout the opening she is presented as a child, with no real desires or wishes of her own. In many respects, she is the traditional rich young woman – without a real mind of her own by virtue of her gender.
When the Inspector arrives, he explains how her spoilt behaviour in a shop led to Eva being sacked. “Then I’m really responsible,” she accepts, quickly recognising her role in the girl’s downfall. Also, she observes that the Inspector is getting ready to speak to Gerald next and pushes this through, asking direct questions to Gerald and working out the reasons why he wasn’t where he said he was the summer before. In both these cases, she is showing independent thought – by accepting responsibility even when others don’t and by pushing Gerald against his wishes.
During their time with the inspector, her parents and Gerald repeatedly try to send Sheila out of the room to protect her from his news – her mother argues that she is “looking tired,” something that we would only really say to a very small child. Sheila repeatedly refuses, arguing that she will stay until “I know why that girl killed herself.” Here, she clearly shows herself standing up to her parents, sticking to her desire to discover the truth of the situation.
At one point Arthur argues that the inspector is making “quite an impression” on Sheila, suggesting that she’s coming around to the inspector’s way of thinking. “We often do on the young ones,” the inspector replies, suggesting that his socialist values are more affective on younger people. This reflects a view of Priestley’s which was that socialism and left wing values are more impactful on younger people, a fact that’s often reflected in even modern opinion polls where right wing conservatives tend to be older. This is also shown in how, by the end of the play, Mr and Mrs Birling remain unchanged by the arrival of the inspector, while their children change – even Gerald admits that the events “affected him,” before he reverts back to his old ways.
Even after the inspector leaves, Sheila continues to push his ideas trying to make sure that her family don’t forget him. She claims they are beginning to “pretend” that nothing has happened, clearly accepting that things won’t be the same again. Her use of the verb is interesting as well, as games of “pretend” are really childish things. It seems that the girl who was once infantilised is now accusing her parents of playing make-believe. She also argues that her parents “don’t seem to have learnt anything,” behaving almost like a school mistress arguing that a lesson has been missed. She also says, in response to a speech from Eric in which he accepts responsibility, that he makes her feel a little less “ashamed” of them, a word which really shows just how powerfully Sheila sees her parents’ remorseless behaviour.
Her frustration is clear throughout the ending, where she says her parents’ behaviour “scares” her. This clearly references the inspectors closing words about “fire and blood and anguish” which referenced the years of war that would follow the period between the play being written and being performed. The audience at this point would doubtless be agreeing with Sheila regarding her fear. Her parents continue to ignore her desire to grow up, infantilising her again by suggesting that she’s just “tired” and “hysterical,” though they can’t ignore her final words when she refuses Gerald’s ring again which clearly shows that she has grown up enough to express herself completely
The inspector essay
When the inspector arrives he cuts off Mr Birling’s lecture when he is saying that “a man must look after himself and his family…” This interruption symbolises the way that inspector is going to stop Mr Birling’s views. Also, it says that there is a “sharp ring on the doorbell.” The word “sharp” suggests that the inspector will cut through Mr Birling’s selfish ideas. Also, from the moment he arrives the stage directions call for the lighting to change from “pink and intimate” to something more “harsh.” This is because the Birlings see the world through as being nice and friendly while the inspector will bring a “harsh” judgement on them.
In the play, the inspector works as a foil to Mr Birling’s selfish capitalism. At the beginning of the play, Mr Birling calls socialists “cranks” – which means crazy – and says that if we all listened to socialists we’d be like “bees in a hive.” This remark criticises socialists as bees lack individuality, they work almost like a big machine, and only do what they’re told and Mr Birling doesn’t want the world to be like this. The inspector, however, believes that we are “members of one body” and that we are “responsible for each other.” In this way, the inspector is talking about the socialist ideas which suggest that because we all live together we should look after each other. In fact, he goes on to suggest that if we don’t learn to do this we will “taught it in fire and blood and anguish.” This is clearly a reference to the two world wars which were fought between the time the play was set and when it was written. It is also telling that Mr Birling didn’t think the wars would happen – he would probably have referred to that as being an idea from some kind of “crank.”
At the beginning of the play Mr Birling threatens the inspector by saying that he plays golf with the Chief Inspector. The inspector, however, doesn’t care and carries on his investigation. Throughout the play, the inspector acts like he doesn’t care about the characters social standings and only wants to focus on the facts. He is someone logical and he doesn’t care what people think of him. He just wants the truth about Eva’s death. He also has a habit of looking “hard” at the person he is addressing. This is because he is inspecting them, almost as though he’s looking through them and into their soul.
In the end the inspector leaves and we are left unsure as to whether he was real or not. However, because his name is Inspector Goole – which sounds similar to Ghoul (which is a kind of spirit or ghost) – the audience would be within their rights to think of him as a kind of spiritual prophet or divine messenger.
Criteria for essay
Criteria for essay
The inspector
In ‘An Inspector Calls’, Inspector Goole is used as a dramatic device, arguably acting as a mouthpiece for J. B. Priestley in order to convey the message of the play - for the audience to be more accepting of socialist ideologies to ensure society never reverts to being dominated by capitalism like it was before the two world wars. This would have a profound impact on the post war audience of 1945 as through their suffering, they would have realised the importance of unity.
Inspector Goole is presented as an omnipotent, powerful figure throughout the play; his presence immediately has the power to change the light and cheerful atmosphere of the Birlings’ dinner party. The lighting changes from “pink and intimate” to “brighter and harder” once the inspector arrives. Here, Priestley’s use of the adjectives “pink and intimate” have connotations of warmth and happiness whereas the comparative adjective “harder” opposes this. Priestley uses the inspector as a dramatic device. Not only could it be argued that the inspector is an immensely powerful figure but also that Priestley uses the specific stage directions that accompany Inspector Goole’s arrival to act as a symbol for how he wants society to improve. The lighting before the inspector arrives suggests that the Birling family – who encapsulate a stereotypical portrayal of a middle class family – were happy whilst they were ignorant to the plight of the working class. The lighting change mirrors how Priestley wants society to change; he wants society to stop being ignorant to the plight of the working class. Additionally, the lighting change foreshadows the rest of the play; through Inspector Goole, Priestley will throw into relief the issues within Edwardian society symbolised by the bright light in which nothing can hide.
Furthermore, J. B. Priestley uses the inspector to convey that he wants society to change and become more empathetic towards the plight of the working class instead of perceiving them as being disposable. When the inspector arrives, he tells the Birling family about Eva Smith’s suicide in which she drank a lot of strong disinfectant that “burnt her inside out”. Here, Priestley’s use of graphic language and violent verb “burnt” evokes an emotional response with the post war audience of 1945 and the twenty first century audience alike. Priestley’s language persuades the audience to feel immense sympathy not only for Eva Smith but also for all of the working class; it could be argued that Eva Smith’s suffering and suicide is used as a metaphor to highlight the continuous struggled faced by the working class, throwing into relief the issues within society and how these problems are ignored by the wealthier classes. Priestley’s gory imagery alternately makes the audience feel profoundly guilty for they may realise how ignorant they have been to ignore the struggles of the working class and persuade them to change by being more empathetic.
