An Inspector Calls Essay 8

An Inspector Calls

An Inspector Calls is set in 1912, during the Edwardian Era. It tells the story of a family's journey from ignorance to enlightenment by using both the plight of an unseen working class girl, and the exploration and questions of an (apparently) conscientious police Inspector in an attempt to change the attitudes of the middle class characters created for this play. This drama brings to light the important issue of how the working class is treated by their so-called ‘superiors', but it could be argued that the playwright also has the intention of making what would have been (at the time of its first performances) theatre audiences made up largely of the middle class walk away from the play at its conclusion, reviewing their lives. Its success over the years is due, I believe, to its mixture of entertainment and desire to edify the audiences, and this makes it enthralling to watch; but what does J. B. Priestley's use of setting contribute to An Inspector Calls, and how successful is he through his use of this device?

An Inspector Calls has one setting throughout: the dining room. This has become, over time, an archetypal symbol of middle class England and, by using this, Priestley suggests to what would have originally been a mainly middle class audience that the events of the play are meant to be a reflection of their own lives. By its conclusion, Priestley suggests to the audience that he intended the moral message of the play to be universal and not just contained within the content of the play. This message is also reinforced at the end when its conclusion is left open, which leaves the audience to reflect on their own lives and behaviour. Because the dining room is so closely associated with middle class England, it is also used by Priestley, I believe, as a representation of so-called ‘polite' society. At the beginning of the play, the dining room protects the family against the outside world: the Birlings and Gerald Croft are in the dining room, celebrating the engagement of Sheila to Gerald. Though it is meant to be a cheerful, happy, romantic time, the conversation is stilted and forced: Mr Birling, for example, talks about business, economics and the welfare of the country and the country, believing that Great Britain is in ‘for a period of steadily increasing prosperity'. There is very little mention of any kind of love or emotion between Sheila and Gerald. This suggests to the audience that the marriage is more about class and power, and less about romance and love. As a contrast to the sense of an arranged relationship between Gerald and Sheila, the Inspector encourages Gerald to reveal details of the time he and Eva (or Daisy) shared. The relationship obviously upsets Shelia; there are hints, however, that Gerald had genuine feelings for Daisy, conceivably that he was even in love with her. He treated her well while she was with him and the Inspector says that ‘he (Gerald) at least had some affection for her and made her happy for a time'. Nevertheless, their relationship did have to finish because of their positions in society. At that time, to marry a working class girl would have brought shame upon the family name. By bringing this situation into the play, Priestley is not so much blaming Gerald for ending his relationship with Daisy, but society for being set up in the way that he did have to finish with her and end the only happiness she had.

Although the mood in the dining room appears to be happy, carefree and relaxed, Priestley creates a sense of underlying tension: Eric, for example, is nervous and Mr Birling's attempt at easy manners have an air of forced unnaturalness so, for a perceptive audience, all is not what it seems in the Birling household. The Inspector's arrival in the dining room symbolises his role in the play: he intrudes on the rituals of polite society; at the beginning, the lighting is pink and subdued, suggesting that everything is calm and placid; however, when the Inspector enters, the lighting changes to being hard and bright, symbolising the change in mood. Not only do the stage directions suggest in terms of lighting the Inspector's role, his actions and attitudes reinforce this impression: soon after his entrance, he is rude to Mr Birling by ‘cutting through, massively' when he is talking. Mr Birling is obviously not used to this happening in his own dining room where he believes he is the head of a happy, united family, as well as a respected man of the town. Priestley's introduction of the Inspector is designed to produce a contrast between the lazy, carefree attitude of the middle class characters and the purposeful determination of the Inspector. He comes in and forces a transformation from the ignorance they possess about the outside world and their lack of real interaction with others not from their social class into the startling reality of a world beyond the dining room. The Inspector disturbs the calm and the dining room is no longer a place of apparent respectability but of secrets and scandals. At the beginning of the play, therefore, the tightness of the setting seems to symbolise a closely-knit family and a place of security; however, as the narrative progresses and more secrets are revealed, the atmosphere begins to feel (for both the characters and the audience) claustrophobic and the family's feelings towards each other reinforce ironically Mr Birling's claim that ‘a man has to make his own way – has to look after himself – and his family too, of course, when he has one – and so long as he does that he won't come to much harm': the members of the family turn on each other, most of them blaming anyone but themselves.

Behind the confined setting of the dining room, there is the implied location of house and town and, beyond that, England. Britain, at the time, was, for a small minority, a prosperous country: it housed the very wealthy yet also the very poor. An Inspector Calls tries to get across to audiences the unfairness of the situation and how the poor were being exploited or ignored by the rich. An Inspector Calls is set in the northern industrial town called Brumley. Though the Birlings live here, the impression is that the Birlings (particularly Sheila and Mrs Birling) never see anything of this, suggesting that they are out of touch with how life is lived by many: ‘Your daughter isn't living on the moon. She's here in Brumley too'. Brumley is fictionalised, but is used by Priestley to suggest that this is any town with similar characteristics - not just one. Further, the Birlings' house is comfortable, presented in stark contrast to the conditions endured by most in the industrial town they live in. For some, the economy of 1912 was in good health. For a small minority, the country seemed to be prosperous; however, there were huge extremes of wealth and poverty. Priestley wanted to portray the unfairness of this situation in An Inspector Calls and how drastically different the situations of the Birlings and Eva Smith were – representing the middle and working classes' positions at that time. Charity was one of the ways in which the poverty experienced by many was attempted to be solved. Mrs Birling uses her position to do charity work: she believes it is out of her innate goodness, but the audience realises that it is her attempt to try to be seen in a favourable light in society. The impression that Priestley gives is that charity work gives rich women the opportunity to be powerful in their own right and decide who to help and who to condemn to poverty for the remainder of their lives, or even (in Eva Smith's case) to effectively kill.

An Inspector Calls is predominantly about social status and class. Though Sheila and Gerald seem to be fond of each other and they are able to banter with each other, the marriage also has benefits for others beyond the couple's happiness. The Birling family is used by Priestley to represent ‘new' money in society (wealth made from industrial production) and the Croft family's ‘old' money (inherited wealth; landed gentry). This makes any ‘partnership' between the children beneficial: Mr Birling is certainly overjoyed and sees the union as a good opportunity to expand both businesses, and looks forward to a time ‘when the Crofts and Birlings are no longer competing but are working together – for lower costs and higher prices'. This suggests that, for Birling, the marriage between Shelia and Gerald is economically advantageous. However, Priestley also shows tension because he suggests that the Crofts feel Gerald could have done better than choose the daughter of the Birling family as a future wife. Mr Birling expresses his concern that he has ‘an idea that your Mother – Lady Croft – while she doesn't object to my girl – feels you might have done better for yourself socially'. He feels snubbed by them not coming to the party and so reveals to Gerald that he is in line for a knighthood – to try to improve his sense of social standing: ‘But what I wanted to say is – there's a fair chance that I might find my way into the next Honours list. Just a Knighthood of course'. Here, Mr Birling tries to prove to Gerald that Sheila is worthy of him in terms of social status but in an apparently ‘modest' way by ending with ‘Just a Knighthood of course' – aware that the Crofts have an hereditary peerage . By doing this, he implies to Gerald that an alliance with the Birling family would not be so disadvantageous for the Crofts. Birling, of course, considers himself to be a self-made, hard-working, respectable man. He expresses to Gerald and Eric his view that ‘a man has to make his own way – has to look after himself – and his family too, of course'. Saying this exposes Birling's politics: now that he has money, he wants his own class to stick together: ‘We employers at last are coming together to see that our interest – and the interests of the capital are properly protected'. The use of the collective pronouns ‘we' and ‘our' in this quotation is an ironic contrast to how he talks about himself as making it on his own. Birling is portrayed as a conceited and self-important man. He believes he is both a good father and husband, providing materially for his family. However, Priestley shows us that he does not provide emotionally for Eric and Shelia; after the revelation of Eric's behaviour, his son says ‘you're not the kind of father a chap could go to when he's in trouble'. Mr Birling does not seem aware of this lack of emotional support - he is both surprised and offended that Eric did not come to him for help: ‘You damned fool – why didn't you come to me when you found yourself in this mess?' The Inspector's role is to open up this issue. The Birling family has everything money could buy, but they don't have love for each other and their treatment, both of themselves and others, reflects this. They do not see people - they only see money and power, as exemplified in their selfish and cruel treatment of Eva Smith.

Priestley explores and attacks what he saw as the hypocrisy of Edwardian England. The social context of the play is very important and he uses characters and relationships to show the audience his view of society. The middle and working classes did not mix, shown on stage by the way Edna is marginalised and treated by the Birlings: ‘All right, Edna. Show him in here. Give us some more light'. Priestley uses this as a visual metaphor for the way the working class is viewed and treated by the upper classes. Also, in 1912, high standards of behaviour were expected from the middle classes, especially women. Status was equated with respectable behaviour - the accepted view was that the middle classes behaved properly and respectfully, whereas the working class were immoral and poorly behaved: ‘As if a girl of that sort would ever refuse money!' The relationship between Daisy and Gerald obviously upsets Shelia; however, in 1912, it was expected that men would have experience with girls before marriage, so it was accepted (but not talked about in the company of women) that men would have sexual relationships with working class girls: Now, Shelia, I'm not defending him. But you must understand that a lot of young men-‘. However, there are hints that Gerald had feelings for Daisy, conceivably that he was even in love with her. He treated her well while she was with him: ‘She told me she was happier than she'd ever been before'. The Inspector stated that ‘he (Gerald) at least had some affection for her and made her happy for a time'. Nevertheless, their relationship did have to end because of their respective social classes. At that time, to marry a working class girl would have brought shame upon the family name. By bringing this situation into the play, Priestley is not so much blaming Gerald for ending his relationship with Daisy but society for being set up in the way that he did have to finish with her and end the only happiness she had: ‘but she knew it couldn't last – hadn't expected it to last. She didn't blame me at all'. The play challenges the dominant view of the time: that breeding was very important. Eva Smith is presented as accepting everything that happens to her with grace. As the play unfolds, Eva behaves more morally as the others act in a more immoral way: she refuses to take stolen money from Eric, even though she had nothing to live on. In contrast the ‘respectable' Birlings and Gerald behave selfishly, with jealousy and even hard heartedly: ‘I didn't see any reason to believe that one story should be any truer than the other. Therefore, you're quite wrong to suppose I shall regret what I did.' They are portrayed as anything but respectable in their dealings with others, although in the house they are apparently the model family.

Another element of setting created by Priestley is his use of historical references. The audience watching the play knows that, two years from the play's setting, that everything in society would change, and Priestley uses dramatic irony to reinforce key ideas. The play is set the week during the first voyage of the Titanic. Mr Birling sees it as an example of progress: ‘Why a friend of mine went over this new liner last week – the Titanic – she sails next week!' The irony is, of course, that the Titanic sank and so, by using this as an example of the progress of mankind, Priestley suggests the fall of society as the Birlings know it. Mr Birling also makes a reference to war: ‘you'll hear some people say that war's inevitable. And to that I say fiddlesticks! The Germans don't want war. Nobody wants war!' This shows he is self important: he thinks he knows everything but, with the benefit of hindsight, the audience knows he is wrong and, therefore, do not support what he says. Britain did progress but not in the way Mr Birling wanted it to: the war was the downfall of society as it was known.

An Inspector Calls was written in 1945, the end of the Second World War, just before the Labour Government came to political power and introduced the welfare state, the aim of which was to look after its citizens from the cradle to the grave. It was a symbol of a new society, one the audience knew about, but the Birlings, in 1912, wouldn't have. Priestley wanted to show his belief that we have responsibility for others, not only ourselves, to the audiences, both in 1945 and now. An Inspector Calls has a very strong moral framework. Its purpose is to entertain the audience, but also to leave them thinking about their lives and behaviour. The author wanted to change British Society for what he believed would be the better and, through this play, he has left his mark. The use of setting strongly reinforces this sense of morality and the intention was for the audiences to relate to their own lives and situations. Priestley wanted to get through to the audience, just as the Inspector gets through to the Birlings, hoping that they, like Shelia and Eric, change their lives for the better.