essay on gender in an inspector calls

English Made Simple

[email protected]

• 1 October 2021 18 October 2022
• 1 Comment on Gender in an inspector calls

In the previous article in these series on the themes on ‘An Inspector Calls’, we looked at the issue of class division and social responsibility being explored in the play and also some of the wider social and historical context which the play was set in.

Some of what was mentioned in that article,   which you can read by clicking on here , also touched upon the issue of the status of women.

Themes in ‘An Inspector Calls’: gender

In addition to the social inequality and class division that existed in Britain at that time there was also the relatively low status of women. Thus Eva Smith suffered not only for being part of the poor working class, reliant on the mercy of her employers (the Birlings in this case) for survival, but also for being a woman. After being sacked by Mr Birling for trying to improve workers rights, she later resorts to earning money through prostition and uses the pseudonym, Daisy Renton.

Whereas ‘Eva Smith’ is a reference to ‘Eve’ (mother of humanity and thus the archetypal woman, and Smith is a common English name, with Eva Smith thus being representative of the average British woman,  ‘Daisy’ is a flower (and when women lose their virginity they can be said to be ‘deflowered’) and ‘Renton’ seems to connect with the word ‘rent’, that is to be paid for financially. In other words Priestly is also highlighting the sexual exploitation of vulnerable working class women by men.

Eva is made pregnant by Mr Birling’s son, Eric, but unlike him is physically impacted by it as the unborn child is inside her womb whereas Eric could live as if nothing had happened, though he did try and support Eva financially. However she refused as he was trying to use money taken illegitimately from Eric’s father’s business, and despite her poverty Eva’s morality was such that she refused to take stolen money. Ironically Eva had approached Mrs Birling in the past after her pregnancy when she went to a charity headed by Mrs Birling.

She sought help but Mrs Birling refused angered by Eva using the name Mrs Birling (which Eva was to somewhat justified in using in the sense that the father of her child was Mr Eric Birling). Mrs Birling, the mother, tells the inspector in the play that a the father (who ironically is her son little to her knowledge) ought to have born the responsibility of helping to support Eva and the pregnant child. Shortly after it emerges that her son, Eric is the father.

What is clear here is how vulnerable and precarious Eva’s existence was and how dependent she was on the good will of people richer than her. There is theme of money and financial aid with her rejecting the money offered to her by Eric as it was stolen money but trying to get aid from Mrs Birling’s charity. Despite doing morally the right thing by refusing the money that was taken from Mrs Birling’s husband when Eva tries to get financial support from the charity she is refused. This ultimately of course contributes to her tragic ending.

It could be argued that Priestly is also seeking to draw attention to the role of not just society, including the more well off in society, but the state. Later on in modern Britain single mothers would receive governmental monetary support to raise their children but not in 1912 when the play was set.

Priestly is highlighting the vulnerability of women, thus our need as a society to help them.

Women in 1912

The situation of women in 1912 was different to that of the 1940s when the play was written. By the 1940s women in Britain had experienced mass employment outside of the house. This was not the first time, the same had happened during the first world war.

However twenty years later it was another generation, and by then at least two generations of women, and two generations of men had personally experienced or been involved in the reality of mass female employment which included changing the financial status of women as their earning power increased.

It was something that was irreversible and though it may seem somewhat archaic today in modern Britain, the concept of a woman being exclusively a housewife eroded and was ended.

Source: ww2today.com

A woman in 1912 was seen as subordinate to a man and socially this persisted for decades after. The famous British comedian Harry Enfield pokes fun at this in some of his sketches in his parody of the early twentieth century British gender roles of the English middle-class, where women are expected ‘to  know their place’ which includes to be secondary ornamental aids to their husbands but not to dare be ‘uppity’ and talk about ‘serious’ topics which are reserved for men. We can find examples of this in the play for instance when Mrs Birling says to her male family members in Act 1:

“I think Sheila and I had better go into the drawing-room and leave you men-“

This was in the context of the female family members retreating and allowing the men to talk about serious things. Thus women did not have a say or voice in important affairs not just in the play, which is an attempt to reflect 1912 Britain, and thus had little role in formulating the society which they were part of, which they lived in. Powerless, voiceless, weak and vulnerable, all adjectives which can in someways be applied to Eva Smith.

A famous BBC sketch on old fashioned attitude towards women in early 20th century Britain.

We also see Mrs Birling say of Eva:

“ “ She was claiming elaborate fine feelings and scruples that were simply absurd in a girl in her position. “

Thus in this quote we can see both classism and sexism at the same time. ‘A girl in her position’. Position refers to her (Eva) social position as a working-class woman, and of course ‘girl’ refers to her gender. There is a supposition, a belief that a ‘girl’ and particularly of that social status should not be ‘uppity’ or have complex or ‘elaborate’ feelings. The working class ought to be simple and basic. Elaborate feelings are thus reserved for the rich. Everyone in that society has a designated role and place and there is little that they can do to challenge that or move out of it, i.e. social mobility.

Priestly however shows us that this dangerous and toxic cocktail of classism and sexism can be dangerous and have harmful consequences as we see in the death of Eva. He, similar to Dickens, provokes the sense of justice and morality amongst some in the affluent classes who would have seen this play and been appalled by the fate of Eva Smith and believed that such a thing could not be allowed to happen and on a fundamental level those deep social factors that contributed to her demise needed to be reformed.

To be fair Sheila does at one point attempt to point to the humanity of female workers when she says:

““But these girls aren’t cheap labour – they’re people” 

Sheila does seem to not fully agree with some of the ideas on class and gender roles prevalent at that time. This is in stark contrast to Mrs Birling who in the beginning of the play tells Sheila when she seems to be having a semi-humorous criticism of Gerald for being busy:

“Now, Sheila, don’t tease him. When you’re married you’ll realize that men with important work to do sometimes have to spend nearly all their time and energy on their business. You’ll have to get used to that, just as I had.”

This is another quote that shows how deeply ingrained the belief in fixed gender-roles for men and women were at that time with Mrs Birling telling her daughter to conform to established gender-roles.

Historical context, Britain before and after ‘An Inspector Calls’.

Ultimately the world view that Sheila had in the play with female workers being ‘people’ (having humanity and not just to be utilised for labour) prevailed. Womens rights progressed in the subsequent decades. The British had two female prime ministers in later generations, Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May. However this was a result of centuries of long and hard struggle. A struggle which cannot be decoupled or delinked from the wider struggle of the working classes for greater rights. Though women were second-class citizens, so for centuries were the majority of their menfolk. Priestly shows however working class men could not seek to advance their rights and neglect the rights and status of women. The working class struggle had to embrace females.

Useful vocabulary for GCSE students in essays and exam questions.

• Misogyny – hatred of women.
• Misogynist – a man who hates women.
• Misogynistic – adjective of misogyny
• Patriarchal   –   a male dominated society
• gender-roles – The roles assigned to men and women in a society.

Example: ‘Priestly highlights the objectification of women as sex items with the words of the Inspector when he refers to Eric and  says:  ““just used her for the end of a stupid drunken evening, as if she was an animal, a thing, not a person,” (Act 3)”

• Suffragettes – a feminist movement of the early 20th century who campaigned for womens rights.
• Vulnerable – being weak and able to go through suffering easily e.g. Eva Smith was vulnerable.
• Conservative – old fashioned or seeking to maintain things as they are and prevent change, Mrs Birling can be said to be quite conservative.

About English Made Simple

English Made Simple is a website dedicated GCSE English, IELTS Preparation and other things providing useful content to readers all across the world on how to improve their English

(1) Comment

• Pingback: Age in an inspector calls - Themes - English Made Simple

Leave A Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Post Comment

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

Example Essay on Geneder Inequality in An Inspector Calls

Here’s an example essay on gender inequality in Priestley’s play An Inspector Calls. It is a 29/30 A*/L9 essay, written by a student. It tackles important topics such as gender inequality, sexual harassment, and objectifying women that were present in Edwardian society.

How does Priestley show his idea about gender inequality in ‘An Inspector Calls’? 

Priestley shows the idea of gender discrimination by suggesting the varied expectations and stereotypes of males and females in 1912 and how they contrast each other. He achieved this by describing men as charming and patriarchal, yet women as reckless and inessential. 

This is demonstrated through the hypocrisy between Eva and Gerald in the opening scene. The stage directions suggest that Gerald is a ‘well-bred young man-about-town’, yet Eva is described as ‘cheap labour’ and frequently objectified by men of a higher class than her. The double standards suggest how an Edwardian society perceived men being considered ‘well-known’ by the towns folk an achievement and something to be applauded for, yet for women, it immediately made them victims of abuse and manipulation. Priestley demonstrates the hypocrisy when Gerald exclaimed ‘I didn’t install her there to make love to her!’ Gerald is objectifying Eva, suggesting how he believes she is worthless and his to deceive. The verb ‘install’ portrays his sexist views on women as he describes her as an accessory to his fortune, hence explaining why he deems it acceptable as he sees himself as the ‘fairy prince’ who is rescuing a vulnerable woman ‘allowing’ her to seek refuge in his company. Priestley may have done this, as a 1945 audience may have argued that Gerald had in fact aided Eva and provided her with life’s basic necessities. However, Priestley may have wanted to suggest how Gerald had an ulterior motive and may have wanted to take advantage of her vulnerability. 

Staging and Performance in An Inspector Calls Explained

The inequality is further demonstrated when the Inspector discovers that Eric had forced himself upon Eva. This revelation examines the danger of inequality. Eric, as a wealthy, upper-class man is very privileged and fortunate, yet he abused this gift by behaving recklessly when he took advantage of Eva. Eric describes himself as ‘being in that state where a chap can easily turn nasty’ when he committed the crime. Much like Gerald, Eric is trying to persuade an audience that his behaviour was justified as he ‘couldn’t remember her name’ the morning after the incident and therefore believed it would have meant as little to her as it did to him, further supporting Priestley’s idea that gender prejudice was a signified issue in 1912. In addition to this, Eva may have been ‘driven to suicide’ by the internalised pain and uselessness she felt. She was a working-class, poor woman who had little to her name and stood very little chance of winning a court case against her offenders. This may have antagonised her situation, as very few people were likely to believe any accusation made by a woman was true, reinforcing how Priestley demonstrates gender discrimination, showing how Gerald objectified and charmed Eva, yet Eric took his actions further and harassed her, showing the dangers of discrimination. The author may have done this to portray to a 1945 audience how Eva had no one to go to and no one to help, possibly explaining why she believed death was the preferred option to living. 

However, to juxtapose my previous points Sybil Birling gives an audience a different perspective on gender discrimination. She is socially superior to her husband and consequently appears very matriarchal in her own ‘bubble’. She is manipulative and patronising, infantilizing her family in phrases such as ‘Now Arthur, I don’t think you ought to talk business.’ Or ‘Eric!’ The use of exclamatives suggests the urgency in her tone and how she is disciplining Eric as if he is a child, despite his current age. She also expresses hubris by asking the Inspector ‘What business’ it is of his to be concerned with how she treated Eva when she came to her charity posing as Mrs Birling. Priestley could have subverted the typical gender expectations of a woman in the Edwardian era to purposefully present to an audience how women can also be merciless and cold, but also the advantage of the less fortunate, like Sybil did when she denied Eva help. This may make an audience question whether gender discrimination is the most important theme in ‘An Inspector Calls’ or class division is. 

In conclusion, I believe that Priestley demonstrates gender inequality to show there was a need for change, and how WWII brought that. It meant that women were no longer considered a trophy or a housewife, but as valuable citizens who fought for Britain just as well as the men did. 

Thanks for reading!   For the full An Inspector Calls course, click here! 

For all our english literature and language courses, click here., related posts.

The Theme of Morality in To Kill A Mockingbird

Unseen Poetry Exam Practice – Spring

To Kill A Mockingbird Essay Writing – PEE Breakdown

Emily Dickinson A Level Exam Questions

Poem Analysis: Sonnet 116 by William Shakespeare

An Inspector Calls – Official AQA Exam Questions

The Dolls House by Katherine Mansfield: Summary + Analysis

An Occurrence At Owl Creek Bridge: Stories of Ourselves:

How to Get Started with Narrative Writing

Robert Frost’s Life and Poetic Career

© Copyright Scrbbly 2022

An Inspector Calls Essays

One of the best things you can do to revise for any english exam is to read examples of essays. below you'll find a range of essays which you can read at your leisure., though there are always benefits in reading essays, becoming use to "active reading" is also important. to do this, use one of these strategies to help:, print the essay off and highlight key phrases or pieces of analysis that you like, keep some notes on the ways the essays use key vocabulary, cherry-picking the best phrases for use yourself, note down the structures of the essays but making a note of the focus of each paragraph, remember that there are hundreds of ways to write a successful essay, as the examples below will highlight. but they all manage to link the big ideas of the play with the language and structure; they all write about priestley's intentions and the audience's responses; they all recognise that this play is written to make a political point, not just to entertain the audience., a) how does priestley explore responsibility in an inspector calls , in the play, priestly wanted the audience to take responsibility for each other, to see that society was "one body." he wanted the audience in 1945 to recognise that although there had been positive changes since 1912, he didn't want them to regress and, in fact, wanted them to demand even more social reform., firstly , priestley uses the inspector to demonstrate to his audience that morality is a much more admirable quality in a person than mr birling's selfish manner. in act 3 mr birling offers "thousands" to help eva, though the inspector tells him that he is “offering money at the wrong time.” this shows that the inspector has the moral high ground and, although from a lower class, is holding all the power over the birling's treasured reputation. to the audience it would be obvious that birling should have given the money earlier, that it was inevitable that eva would end up costing him. it is also revealing that birling wouldn't give eva smith a small pay rise as it would have meant he couldn't "lower prices" but when it came to saving his status he was prepared to “give thousands.” by this stage, mr birling seems quite flustered and somewhat embarrassed as although in the outside world his authority is growing in his own home he can't control a man of “that class.” from a psychoanalytic perspective you could argue that this reflects birlings upbringing and the values that he was taught to respect as a younger man when he worked had and was kept poor in a way that taught him the value of hard work. in this way, mr birling feels that all the people who have money deserve it while the people who don't have money clearly don't deserve it. also, it is from his background that birling being taught to prioritise materialistic things could be the root of his difficult relationship with eric; he comes across as very cold and unforgiving which possibly reflected onto his son. this could easily be a subconscious cause of eric's addiction (looking for escape and comfort in the absence of his father's approval) and be linked to why eva viewed him to be more juvenile than gerald. the need for superficial things in his life like power and wealth is portrayed in the play as quite harmful and only something which will hold a person back, the inspector seems to be free from all these hindering social constructs and is definitely a much more favourable character because of this., in spite of their strong differences in beliefs, both mr birling and the inspector are very self-assured characters who are equally set in their ways . this is not mirrored in the younger characters like eric or sheila. priestly emphasizes a message directed towards the younger generations that they are the hope for change. throughout the play birling refuses to accept the need for reform or responsibility , he represents the stereotypical man of his age and class that priestley uses to contradict sheila's growing outward-looking empathy. when she promises the inspector that she will “never never do it again to anybody” she is acknowledging her privileges and shows that she understands how people must take responsibility for each other. i would say that her materialistic upbringing and the damage that has done makes her incredibly naive and impacts hugely on her opinion of others' worth. when talking about eva smith in act 1 one of the first things she asked was “is she pretty” from this line alone it is clear to the audience where her priorities lie and what kinds of values were instilled in her from a young age probably by her shallow mother. priestly highlights that it's the duty of the young to bring about reform and for this to happen they firstly need to realise the older generations won't do it for them. he also stresses that it's not ok for people like the birlings to take credit for their achievements but never accept responsibility for the consequences of their profit., priestley uses the contrast between age groups and class to explore universal divides caused by pride, reputation and lack of accountability, things that mr and mrs birling value highly but sheila is willing to let go of by accepting her mistakes and returning gerald's engagement ring (also rejecting her father's business interest in gerald.).

Examiners commentary:

The simple, clear first paragraph is fine.

The second paragraph, however, contains some interesting points that could be related to the question but which aren't. As a result, a lot of what's good in this paragraph is lost. This could have been easily fixed if the student had remembered to continually link their points back to the question.

The third paragraph is an improvement in that it does mention responsibility more often and has some interesting observations about the generation gap.

The third paragraph feels unfinished and unclear - it sounds like it's saying that Mr and Mrs Birling value accountability highly, or that the view a "lack of accountability" highly, neither of which are true.

AO1: Lots of AO1, though it isn't connected to the question often enough

AO2: Not enough AO2 at all - hardly any specific language analysis

AO3: Nothing of note outside of the first paragraph

Grade: This is a difficult essay to grade. There are lots of interesting points, especially about how our upbringings affect our outlook, but they're not always linked to the question which means they won't score as well as they should. Also, a complete lack of AO2 causes real problems. This is probably a G5 though with a few minor changes it could easily be pushed up two grades.

B) How does Priestley explore responsibility in An Inspector Calls ?

Priestley presents a strong message about responsibility throughout the play. he wants us all to take more responsibility for each other., firstly, he uses the character of mr birling to convey the ignorance of those who refuse to take responsibility. we can see this when mr birling says, “community and all that nonsense”. the use of the noun “nonsense” shows the audience that mr birling is mocking socialists and those who believe society should be a community. you can almost hear his sarcastic tone as if ‘community’ is an absurd idea. the word “all” also highlights his belief that anything to do with community, such as helping others and being responsible for one another, is ridiculous. this links to when he says, “a man has to mind his own business and look after himself and his own.” the repetition of the pronoun “his” emphasises that he only takes care of his possessions and doesn’t think twice about others. also, it exposes to the audience his sense of higher class entitlement linked to his lack of responsibility for things that are not directly his fault. the audience of 1945 would have been shocked because by this time, after the labour movement and war, people were becoming more open-minded about mixing social classes and community responsibility. this links to priestley’s message because he was a socialist and believed people should have equal rights., in contrast to mr birling, priestley uses the character of sheila to present those who are willing to take responsibility. we see this in the line, “i’ll never, never do it again to anyone”. the repetition of “never, never” reveals that sheila feels guilty and deeply regrets her actions. it also tells the audience that she is open-minded about changing how she behaves, regardless of her social class. the use of the noun “anyone” reveals that she doesn’t care if the person is upper class or lower class. she doesn’t want to put anyone in that position again and has taken full responsibility. if this play had been shown in 1912, the audience may have been more likely to agree with the birling’s ideas and would have thought sheila may be acting foolishly. however, the audience of 1945 would have been more sympathetic towards sheila because at this time, society was shifting towards the creation of the nhs, the introduction of education for all and the building of social housing. this reflected how society was coming together more and caring more for the poor instead of brushing them aside., similarly, the character of inspector goole is the main voice of responsibility in the play and is the voice of priestley himself as he is trying to show the birling family that being upper class doesn’t make them any less responsible for the community than the next person. this sense of responsibility is also reflected in the stage directions when the light goes from “pink and intimate” and “brighter and harder”, when the inspector enters. immediately, this tells us that the i nspector has a presence on the stage and that he has come to say something important. perhaps it is about bri nging light to the things that the upper classes like to hide in the shadows, or the harsh lighting works almost like he is interrogating the family. the spotlight is now on them and what they have done., additionally, priestley conveys a message of responsibility through the inspector when he says, “we are members of one body.” the noun “members” highlights that we are all joined together and if one member falls, then it brings everything down. furthermore, it links to the idea that community is like a family who should take care of each other no matter what. it could also have religious connotations because in the last supper jesus said, “this is my body that will be given up for you, take this in memory of me.” here, jesus said that people should eat the bread because it would bring everyone together and he always believed that people should be equal. in 1912, people were very divided and the poor would rarely move up to the higher classes. priestley was aiming to ensure that the shifts in society happening in 1945 were strengthened and that everyone felt that responsibility for others was important..

Really clear structure, with a clear target for each paragraph

Doesn't make a wide range of points but has a quote to backup each point and explores the quote in depth

Each section ends with something about the context

Though each point is presented with a quote attached, this could have been improved with some other references from the play even if those quotes or references weren't analysed in depth

AO1: Not much AO1 really, no real refernces to key moments of plot

AO2: Lots of great AO2 - quotes analysed in depth

AO3: Good AO3, all key points linked to context

Grade: A really neat, clear and well organised essay. A lack of AO1 is a problem, as is the fact that although each paragraph was linked to an idea connected to responsibility the link isn't always made clear. However, there's loads of AO2 and AO3 so it would be a comfortable G7. With a couple of sentences added to each paragraph which referenced a few key moments of plot it would go up to a G8.

C) How does Priestley explore responsibility in An Inspector Calls ?

Priestley explores ideas about responsibility through the way the birlings behave towards eva smith. arthur birling explains the family’s capitalist philosophy when he says ‘a man has to mind his own business and look after himself and his own’ which suggests that he feels that he only has responsibility for his own family and himself . this is reinforced by the way the birlings treat eva smith. first of all, arthur fires her from his factory to make an example of her because she asks for higher wages and dares to take responsibility for others by speaking up on their behalf. it is revealed that arthur’s prime motive is to keep wages down so that he could make more profits. priestley reinforces this through arthur’s constant repetition of ‘hard headed man of business’, to remind the audience that he is representative of capitalism and the damage it causes. the word ‘business’ is later used by birling to refer to the death of eva smith as he states how her death is ‘horrid business’ which emphasises the message that birling only sees people’s lives in terms of profit. priestley is showing the audience that a blind belief that generating profits and prosperity for the good of everyone is fundamentally wrong as it causes innocent people to suffer tragic consequences., although all the birlings are responsible for eva’s mistreatment and death in some way, they react differently when they find this out from the inspector. mr and mrs birling do not change and are only concerned about their reputation - the possible ‘scandal’ or arthur’s ‘knighthood’. however, priestley’s intention is give the audience a message of hope as sheila and eric do recognise that they have behaved badly by the end of the play and therefore he is suggesting that it is the younger generation that have the responsibility for adopting more socialist principles. through the younger birlings’ attitudes, priestley suggests that socialism is the modern way and that it is young people who will change society for the better., this change of views in the younger generation is also shown through the play’s structure as eric dramatically exits the stage at a crucial point suggesting he is struggling to contain his guilt over his mistreatment of eva smith. likewise, sheila is struggling with her guilt and tries to show that she has changed by directing others to realise their own responsibility in eva smith’s suicide. for example, sheila warns her mother not to ‘build up a wall’ this metaphor describes the separation of the social classes as mrs birling believes she is superior to the lower classes. the irony is that the opposite is true as priestley reveals how mrs birling’s behaviour is morally wrong – she punished a pregnant girl by refusing her charity when she needed it the most just because the girl used her name and in doing so angered mrs birling., through using the form of a morality play, priestley is able to identify what each family member’s sins and how it was these sins that they demonstrated and caused their mistreatment of eva smith. for instance, eric’s lust for eva smith meant that he forced himself upon eva and then his sloth – his inability to earn his own money meant he stole money from his father instead of facing up to his responsibility and earning money himself. by the end of the play, priestley shows that eric fully accepts his responsibility and describes how he cannot even remember his assault of eva as being a ‘hellish thing’. the use of this metaphor implies he is being tortured by his own guilt and knows he has been committed to hell due to his sins., priestley constructs the inspector’s role as that of a priest as he extracts all the confessions from the birlings and attempts to force them to accept their responsibilities through asking questions which challenge their capitalist way of life and challenges their edwardian values of social class and hierarchy. in addition, the inspector’s language has religious tones to it as he warns the birlings and gerald croft that if they do not stop exploiting the poor, they will learn their lesson with ‘fire, blood and anguish’. there is an inference that they will be punished in hell for not caring about the way those less fortunate are treated. through the inspector’s voice, the audience hear the socialist message that the birlings are being taught and we left knowing that this is a warning to us all – we need to accept responsibility and take better care of others around us., how does sheila change during an inspector calls, - summary paragraph, - stage directions, - confrontation with the inspector – she takes responsibility, - standing up to her parents, - the young are more impressionable, - ending – grown up, 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, how does priestley present mrs birling as an unlikeable character (high level response), priestley presents mrs birling as an unlikable character as she doesn’t change throughout the play. in acts 1 and 2 she doesn’t say much about the tragic death of eva at all, showing her lack of remorse., on the other hand, characters like sheila do realise the horror of the suicide. in act 2, gerald says “sorry, i’ve just realised a girl has died”. this is ironic [sic] as he had found out in act 1, but it had only sunken in in act 2. the word “sorry” shows he feels embarrassed about his emotional side, as many men of the time (1912) did., sheila also changes throughout, creating a stark contrast to her mother. in act 1 she refers to her mother as “mummy” like when she says “mummy, isn’t it a beauty” this shows she was dependant on her and worried about material things. she later says, “but these girls aren’t cheap labour, they’re people” to mr birling, showing his daughter isn’t afraid to voice her opinion but her mother is. in act 2, sheila says, “we really must stop these silly pretences”. the inclusive pronoun “we” not only presents sheila as the family member doing the right thing and trying to influence others, as her mother should, but also involves the audience, trying to give them a message. the noun “pretences” is significant as it was mrs birling who pretended not to remember eva smith., when she was shown the photo it was evident that mrs birling didn’t change throughout as at the end of the play in act 3 gerald suggests that “he’s been had”, and the birlings are keen to accept it, whilst sheila and gerald remain guilt-stricken. the audience of the time, in 1945, would have just experienced the war and realised everyone must start taking care of one another. they may have not been so quick to change, as, at the time, only rich, most-likely capitalist, people would have gone to the theatre to see the play, whereas a modern audience is more diverse and open., priestley also presents mrs birling as an unlikable character as she is dismissive towards many different groups. for example, she says “a girl of that class” when her part in the suicide is revealed. the noun “girls” shows mrs birling’s views that working class girls are undeserving of names. this derogatory comment would have infuriated an audience of 1945 as the working class were extremely beneficial during the war, though the class divide was massive in 1912. she is even misogynist, like mr birling, who says “clothes mean something different to women”. she says “sheila and i had better go to the drawing room”, which shows her views on women’s place in society, due to gender roles. she also says men have to spend a lot of time working away, but sheila challenges it and says she won’t get used to it. it is obvious priestley has used the younger generations as a symbol for more open-minded people as eric also challenges mr birling on war. mr birling says the titanic is “unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable”. the repetition and qualifiers enhance the dramatic irony as he was wrong about both of these things. it is almost as though priestley is mocking people like mr birling., mrs birling also has capitalist views which don’t change throughout the play. she believes in a social hierarchy as seen in the stage directions before the play begin, where the characters are placed around a rectangular table which gives power to those at the top and bottom, and when she says, “be quiet and let your father think of what we should do next”. the imperative verb “be” shows how she is even being rude towards her own children., this contrast with shelia’s feminism, which was popular due to the suffragette movement in 1912, significant after 1945 as many women helped the war effort and important to a modern audience who have achieved so much. mrs birling uses her powers for bad as she “influenced” the committee to refuse eva help., priestley uses the play as an allegory for his socialist views. by inducing a sense of hatred towards mrs birling he allows the audience to see the flaws in a capitalist mind-set. priestley, having served in the war himself, developed strong socialist views. this is reflected in the inspector, who is a mouthpiece for priestley as he uses the metaphor, “we are all part of one body” to imply everyone should look after one another. priestley had a popular radio programme which was cancelled for being too “left wing” by the bbc. as time progresses, the audience becomes more socialist and the play is more effective., priestley presents mrs birling as having double standard. this can be seen in the quotation, “i’m sorry eric… didn’t know”, after finding out it was her son she was talking about when she said he should take full responsibility for eva’s pregnancy., despite stage directions calling for pink, intimate lighting at the beginning, mrs birling never seems to be intimate with her children. when the inspector asks if eric drinks, she says “of course not, he’s only a boy”, which shows she is either lying or not close with her family. however, sheila says he’s been “steadily drinking for two years”, showing she is either trying to get him into trouble or is keen to get him help. either way, she is closer with him than his own mother. the siblings also exchange comments when she calls him “squiffy”. the colloquialism has mrs birling unaware of the changes and reluctant to change her mind-set. this also foreshadows the importance of alcohol in the play as it was the cause of eric’s behaviour., how does priestley present the views of the inspector in an inspector calls (high level response), inspector goole is presented as an omnipotent, powerful figure throughout the whole 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" suggests a warm and happy atmosphere whereas the 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 stage directions that 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 are a stereotypical portrayal of a middle class family – were happy whilst they were ignorant to the working class. the lighting change tells us how priestley wants society to change; he wants society to stop being ignorant to the working class., furthermore, j. b. priestley uses the inspector to convey that he wants society to change and become more empathetic towards 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”. 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 guilty because 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., priestley suggests that a pressing issue with the twentieth century society is that people are reluctant to take responsibility for their actions. this view is encapsulated through the use of the elder members of the birling family, arthur birling and his wife mrs birling – who do not take responsibility for their actions towards eva smith. however, priestley uses the inspector to try to change this. the inspector states that if we share nothing else, “we have to share our guilt”. here priestley uses the personal pronoun “we” to give society a sense of unity, implying everyone must do the same and follow the inspector’s teachings. ‘an inspector calls’ was set in 1912, a time in which society was divided by not only gender but by social class. priestley wants the middle and upper classes to transform from abusing their power to dominate and exploit the working class to instead being more responsible for their actions and treating people more sympathetically ., priestley uses the inspector to convey the consequences of what will happen if members of society do not change. he states that we will be “taught” in “fire and blood and anguish”. priestley’s use of a triplet of nouns act as metaphors for the two world wars. the entire play is used as a motif for the wars; if society proceeds to not improve the way in which members of society treat each other, the world wars will repeat in an endless cycle until we learn. here, the inspector is presented as an omnipotent being. ‘an inspector calls’ was written and first performed at the end of the second world war therefore the contemporary audience will have experienced the perpetual suffering that comes with them. priestley uses the inspector to make the audience fearful as they are persuaded to think that the inspector is a god-like character imposing judgement on society. this will persuade all audiences to change their actions and embrace socialist ideologies of caring for other members of society which is what priestley intended them to do., priestley wants the middle and upper classes to stop being selfish and exploiting the poor for their own financial gain, but instead be more generous and empathetic towards other members of the working class. the inspector is almost an impartial figure in the play because he does not fit into the distinct levels of society. this gives the audience the impression that the inspector is an unbiased figure; they will be persuaded to listen to him and change their views., compare priestley’s presentation of eva smith and shelia birling., in the play ‘an inspector calls’ we see a family called the birlings that consist of many different characters, personalities and beliefs. we only begin to see these different aspects when the family begin to learn how each one of them was involved in causing the chain of events which led a girl, eva smith to commit suicide. there are two characters in particular who are very different in the way that they live their lives and their own outlook on life. these two characters are eva smith and shelia birling., shelia is the daughter of sybil and arthur birling. they are a well-known family in brumley and are in the public eye constantly because of the position her father holds within the town as he is on the bench and the owner of the big birling and company and is due to marry gerald croft whose parents are very well-known also., eva smith is almost the opposite of the social scale to shelia. she has no friends or family to rely on and is quite an independent woman. she struggles to get by and is unable to cope with the strains that she is forced to be under at her age., at the beginning of the play we see shelia at the table with her family and how she is influenced by her family’s thoughts. she was quite childish and used petty excuses for her actions ‘i told him that if they didn’t get rid of that girl, i’d never go near the place again’. this shows that shelia had the same approach about how to treat others of the lower class as her father, which is not a good quality that shelia and arthur birling share., when we first hear of eva smith in the play we learn about the time that she experienced while working at birling and company. she was outspoken, resilient and gutsy as she led a group of workers on strike in an attempt to get higher wages ‘she’d had a lot to say-far too much- so she had to go’., there we see the huge difference in the lives that each of them live, but it is the way that shelia changes as the play goes on and learns more about eva smith’s life., once shelia knows more about the family’s effect on eva’s life she becomes more defiant, and mature. she begins to stand up to her parents who still look down on eva. she realises that there is no need to treat a person the way that the birling family did, no matter whether it was the same girl or not ‘everything we said had happened really hadn’t happened. if it didn’t end tragically, then that’s lucky for us. but it might have done.’ she has a more compassionate approach to eva and her life as she learns about the suffering that this girl the same age as herself had to go through., priestly shows the importance of caring for others within your community by showing that if the birling’s had looked after eva smith and treated her with any respect then maybe it would have prevented her suicide, because she would have been in a lot happier state of mind. this also takes place near to every one of us. if you treat one person unacceptably then you never know what effect that may have on them and others around them, if you do your bit to treat every person with decency that you meet then you will have no regrets with what you have done., priestly also shows through shelia that she was the next generation, with the new ideas of how people of another class should be treated and how the other birling’s are still living in the old, traditional frame of mind, which is harsh and uncaring to others. whereas shelia would be a middle aged woman when priestly wrote the book, he wanted to show the difference of views between the younger and older generations of 1912., shelia birling and eva smith are very different characters, but it is the effect that they can have on each other’s lives which highlights priestley’s views about community., to what extent could you argue that mr birling is the most important character in an inspector calls , as the ‘head of the household’ mr birling is, arguably, the central character to an inspector calls. throughout the beginning of the play he displays the kind of arrogance that priestley expected to see from a selfish capitalist; throughout the exchange, he is completely unapologetic about the death of eva; and after the inspector leaves, he tries his hardest to get out of trouble. also, if you argued that an inspector calls is really a morality play, then you could see mr birling as representing the deadly sins of greed and pride, both things that priestly attacked capitalists for., at the beginning of the play, mr birling is described as “heavy looking” which immediately reminds us of a large, well fed, rich man, enjoying the luxuries of life. his “easy manners” but “provincial speech” remind us that although he is now rich (as symbolised by his knowledge of manners) he is from working class roots (provincial means from the country, or of a lower class.) mr birling is one of those men who had made money during the industrial revolution and, priestley argues, was then exploiting the working classes for his own profit., during the opening exchanges over dinner, birling shows off to gerald croft – his daughter’s new fiancé – by mentioning some rather expensive port he bought, and then gives a long and stuffy speech about how lucky his children are to be born into a time of such good fortune. throughout the speech priestley uses a lot of dramatic irony as he mentions birling’s belief that there would be no labour issues (despite the fact that the russian revolution was just five years away;) there would be no war in germany (despite two being on the horizon,) and – in a moment of comedy – that the titanic was “unsinkable.” throughout this speech, audience members are reminded of how little we know about the future, and how important it is that we prepare for the unexpected. birling is shown to be arrogant, small minded, and selfish; all features that a socialist like priestley would expect to see in a capitalist like birling., priestly times the inspector’s arrival so that he cuts birling off during one of his selfish rants: “a man has to mind his own business and look after himself,” he is saying as the doorbell rings. his initial response to the inspector is immediately defensive: he delivers a short speech detailing the members of the local police force that he knows, and the fact that he used to be mayor. the inspector seems uninterested though. throughout their exchange birling makes it clear that he feels no responsibility saying a number of times that he had nothing to do with this “wretched” girl’s death. the use of this adjective is interesting as “wretched” can mean poor or downtrodden, but it can also mean disliked and disgusting; birling, we have to assume, feels both are true. at one point he argues, perfectly summarising priestley’s feelings about the attitude of people like birling: “i can't accept any responsibility. if we were all responsible for everything that happened to everybody we’d had anything to do with, it would be very awkward.”, during the remainder of the play, mr birling continues to reveal himself as being selfish and without regret. he is continually worried about the threat to his dreamt of knighthood and, when the chance arises, is even happy to direct all the blame at his young son, eric. he also tries to bribe the inspector, offering him “thousands” now it has all gone wrong, despite the fact that he wouldn’t pay her even a few shillings more at the time. throughout act 3, it is mr birling who leads the campaign to recognise the inspector as being a fraud and he is the most relieved when it turns out that there is no dead girl. however, unlike sheila, he isn’t relieved that no-one had died but is simply pleased to have saved his own hide., however, as the main character in the play mr birling receives both the opening and closing lines. in the end, it is him who is stuck, holding the phone and revealing that there is and “inspector on the way,” and in many ways it is him that the audience will be most pleased to see get his just deserts., what is the role of the inspector in an inspector calls , an inspector calls is a parable that was set during the belle époque (meaning the beautiful period) which lasted from 1870-1914. in the play, a family have their dinner party interrupted by an inspector who comes to visit. though this is a morality play in the traditional sense, its moral compass is very much set by the author’s belief in socialism ., the inspector arrives at a critical point. mr birling, the patriarch of his family, is delivering a lecture to his son and future son-in-law, about how “men must look after themselves…” in this way he is exposing his deep selfishness – one that priestly believed was at the heart of all capitalists. at this point there is a “sharp ring on the doorbell,” the adverb perhaps foreshadowing how the inspectors arrival will cut through the birlings’ veneer of respectability ., almost as soon as he arrives, mr birling reminds him of his own social standing – that he used to be mayor and has played golf with the chief inspector. the fact that mr birling is threatening the inspector is barely concealed , though the inspector brushes it aside. as a morality play, all the characters in an inspector calls represent something else - an ideal or social group or class. here, the birlings represent the wealthy and privileged elite while the inspector represents the newly educated middle classes, who would rise up and form a bridge between the elite and the working classes below them. the inspector, as becomes clear, is here to ensure that the birlings do not get away with how they treated eva smith., the inspector is described as giving an “impression of massiveness.” this is interesting as it makes it clear that he isn’t massive but should give that “impression.” as a direction this is a bit of a nightmare for a casting agent . he shouldn’t be big, but should have a gravitas that makes him seem huge. fortunately, however, priestley has written a part that gives every opportunity for moral superiority for an actor., also, from the moment he arrives the stage directions call for the lighting to change from “pink and intimate” – perhaps reflecting the rose - tinted spectacles through which the birlings view the world – and to something more “harsh.” perhaps this change is designed to highlight how the inspector’s arrival puts the birlings behaviour in the spotlight or exposes the lies they kept hidden in the shadows ., the first to fall to his inspection is mr birling, who sacked eva after she arranged for a strike amongst his workers while they demanded more pay. though birling admitted that she was a good worker, he clearly saw his profits threatened by her behaviour and made an example of her. mr birling’s children, however, do not share his selfishness and, as his son points out, “why shouldn’t they try for higher wages we try for bigger profits.” in many ways this quote exposes the selfish, unreasonable nature of capitalists : that they see their own right to desire more profits as god given , while those who resist are “troublemakers” and “cranks.”, after mr birling, the inspector turns to sheila, who had eva sacked from her job in a local department store. it is clear from the story – which sheila tells – that she was jealous of eva’s good looks. it is also clear, however, that sheila deeply regrets her actions. not long after this, mrs birling comments that sheila’s feelings have been changed and claims that the inspector has made an “impression” on her. this is a telling word – an “impression” is something that is the result of pressure, as though she’s been bullied into seeing things differently; but it is also something that often disappears over time. mrs birling’s feelings are clear: that the inspector’s ideas have affected sheila, but only fleetingly . the inspector replies dryly , acknowledging that he will often have an effect on the young. in many ways this reflects the old adage that young people are more socialist by nature, gradually turning to the more self-centred right as they grow. this is certainly the point that is being made by priestley, as the inspector affects the younger generation far more than their elders., after sheila, he turns to gerald who, again, reveals his own role in the death of eva. by this stage she is known as daisy renton – a name that perhaps reflects the fact her position: daisies are simple flowers that call to mind the innocence of daisy chains; while the appearance of “rent” in her name reminds us of what she did to her body in order to survive., the play continues to get darker as the inspector turns to mrs birling. under pressure she tells the inspector, and the audience, about how she turned away a young pregnant woman and that if the inspector was doing his job properly he should be chasing down the father. at this point, the audience know that she is talking about eric and are tensely waiting for the big reveal. in many respects it is also at this point that the audience is forced to reflect on the nature of this play: up until this moment, the action seems relatively realistic and, although the focus has been on only one character at any time, the focus has shifted around the room without any seeming construction . this time, however, the structure is too neat to be believed; it’s too well constructed to maintain the illusion of realism , and we know that we are watching a parable in which the inspector has an almost divine control over the action., after exposing the family’s “crimes” the inspector finally delivers his closing speech, which has all the hallmarks of a sermon that is delivered to the audience as much as it is to the family. in it, he reminds us of all the eva smiths and john smiths there are in the world, and that we are “one body.” here, the inspector is addressing both the audience in 1945 and the audience in 1912. the telling difference was the two world wars, during which the working classes proved themselves to be every bit as strong and resilient as their “social superiors.” the sense of national bonding that took place during the wars led to significant social changes in the uk, not least the creation of the nhs and the welfare state, and it was characters like the inspector (and priestley) who made sure this happened., his final warning, however, that “if we do not learn this lesson we will be taught it in fire and blood and anguish,” has a slightly different meaning in the two time periods. for the family in 1912 it was prophetic ; but for an audience in 1945 it would have been suggesting that the wars were almost a punishment for their behaviour, and a way of suggesting that if they didn’t embrace socialism now then the wars, and all the horrors that came with them, would return again., at the end of the play, the birlings receive a phone call which tells them that a real police inspector is on the way, to talk about a girl who has recently died. this final moment raises questions about the role of the inspector goole we’ve just watched, and it is at this point that his name seems important: is he a goole, or a ghoul, or something else from some other world is he some angelic messenger send to bring divine judgement that question is never answered, though the audience – or the young ones at least – should have no doubts that his understanding of the world is from a “higher” place., another essay on the role of the inspector in an inspector calls ., this essay's structure is as follows:, a summary paragraph, how the inspector is introduced, mr birling and the inspector – good for ao2, a “panic” paragraph – without quotes – that picks up on some key moments from the rest of the play – good for ao1, the inspector at the end, in the play an inspector calls, a police inspector brings judgement to a rich family who live in 1912. the play is a morality play, in which each of the characters represents a particular role or opinion. in this morality play, the inspector promotes a socialist understanding of the world in a way that reflects the views of the play’s author jb priestley., 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., a third essay on the role of the inspector in an inspector calls , jb priestley uses the story of an inspector calls to contrast the differences between upper/upper-middle and working class people in society during the edwardian times. the inspector questions the birling family to think about the consequences of their actions on others – predominately the working class and people whom they believe to be inferior to them. priestley uses the inspector to make society question their morals and think about accepting responsibility for their actions. each character reacts differently to the inspector and priestley uses this to represent capitalist vs socialist ideals., - nice opening – clear and specific and leaves the examiner comfortable that you know what you’re doing. may be a bit long – though it is all meaningful, when the inspector enters the birling household, the stage directions states that the lights change from ‘pink and intimate’ to ‘brighter and harder’. this shows how the presence of the inspector changes the atmosphere and how he is here for a purpose. the lighting change from ‘pink and intimate’ to ‘brighter and harder’ almost shows how the inspector is going to burst the birling’s protected, capitalist bubble. the idea of the lights being ‘brighter and harder’ create the idea of a spotlight shining on the birling family and how the inspector is there to expose them to the truth. in the stage directions, it also says that the inspector ‘creates an impression of massiveness’. this shows that although the birling’s are superior to him in class, the inspector still holds the authority over them all. it could also be foreshadowing that the inspector is going to create a lasting ‘impression’ over the birling family and impact their lives hopefully for the better., - super cool lots of detail, specific things being said and focusing on sections of the text. this is what you want to do, in act one, mr birling makes several threats to the inspector about his connections with the chief constable. this shows how mr birling feels threatened and uncomfortable with the inspectors presence. he tries to assert his authority over the inspector to protect himself and his pride as he’s being questioned by someone who is inferior to himself. he doesn’t want to damage his reputation and all he is thinking about is himself. this represents the capitalist society and how they refuse to think of any but themselves and how they will go to any measure to protect their reputation. mr birling also tries to emphasise his importance to the inspector by mentioning gerald and his family name. he says, “perhaps i ought to explain first that this is mr gerald croft – the son of sir george croft – you know, crofts limited.” by mentioning gerald’s family name, it shows how mr birling is trying to intimidate the inspector. also, mr birling could be mentioning the croft name to try to make himself feel more in control of the situation and back in the superior position in the room. priestley uses the reaction of mr birling to the inspector to represent how people of the upper capitalist class use their positions of power as an excuse to be ignorant to their actions. priestley wanted make people aware of this to questions their own ignorance., - again, this is great. you show a clear understanding of the relationship between birling and the inspector and clearly explain the power dynamic in the room, at the end of the play, the inspector makes a big final speech to the birling family. it opens with a reminder that there are thousands of “john smiths and eva smiths” in the world. this reminds the audience that we all have to accept responsibility for our actions and realise it is not enough to only think of ourselves but we must think of others as well. the inspector then goes on to say that “we don't live alone. we are members of one body. we are responsible for each other.” these three concise sentences summarise the lesson priestley was trying to convey to the audience. by keeping the sentences short but powerful, it leaves a lasting impression on the birling family but more importantly, the audience. this links to the beginning stage direction of the inspector creating an ‘impression of massiveness’. he then warns the family (and audience) that if ‘men don’t soon learn their lesson they will be taught in fire and blood and anguish’. this is a reference to the many years of war that had taken place between when the play was set and when it was performed. it could be seen to be served as a warning to the people that they need to change their actions or history will repeat itself., - really good as well. you’ve focused in on specific techniques here and shown a clear understanding of how those techniques have effects., overall, this is a very good essay – it’s got a wide range of detailed quotes, points and pieces of analysis. it could be improved with a few moments where you zoom in on specific words and explore the meaning of them – think about mr birling saying he “can’t” take responsibility, or mrs birling saying she “won’t” take responsibility and the inspector saying “we are responsible.” this kind of link will push this essay up into the 8-9 category., what is the significance of the ending in an inspector calls , in effect, ‘an inspector calls’ has arguably three endings, or climaxes. the first is the final speech of the inspector, before he exits dramatically, walking ‘straight out’. the second is as the family think it all may have been a ‘fake’. the third represents the justice in the final words of the play., priestly ensures that the inspector says little in the way of moral judgment until just before he exits. this in itself increases dramatic tension – the audience is waiting for a confrontation which is dependent on all the facts of the story finally emerging. his final speech is based on the great moral authority he has gained through the entirety of the play and is in a sense cathartic. as an ‘inspector’, he is symbolic of the moral and legal authority of the police force. ‘inspecting’ carries the idea of sifting carefully though the actions of the birlings in a detailed and objective manner. priestley adds objectivity and legal precision to the inspector’s character; thus by the climax of his investigation, we, the audience, instinctively trust his moral conclusions also. there is a sense of relief in hearing the birlings finally being condemned for their actions., the inspector’s final speech is, in tone, almost a sermon. the frequent use of blunt, short diction is combined with imperatives which make him seem almost a preacher or a prophetic figure, as he tells the birlings to “remember this”, and tells them that “we are responsible for each other.” although he uses often the first person plural to emphasise their common humanity, he is also accusatory with his use of ‘you’ as he threatens them with what will come if they fail to learn this lesson. the imagery priestley draw from is biblical by nature. from the eucharist service, the inspector uses the biblical metaphor that we are all “members of one body”. the well-known nature of this metaphor makes it seemingly self-evidently true to the audience. the apocalyptic imagery that follows is equally well-known, as the inspector promises “fire and blood and anguish”. the tricolon is heavily emphatic and emotive – the birlings’ rejection of it, which follows swiftly, creates a further sense of their moral vacuity. this sermonic end to the inspector’s presence onstage makes him seem a didactic mouthpiece for the play – he speaks in effect as much to the audience as to the birlings. although it is a relatively brief and restrained speech, nonetheless it is a powerful end – it seems – to the drama., birling’s absence of moral epiphany is enacted in the second ‘ending’ of the play in the ‘huge sigh of relief’ he emits when he discovers that the inspector is not actually from the police station. he rejects the inspector’s final words through this stage direction which creates a dramatic hyperbole that it is impossible for the audience to miss. eva smith’s name suggests that she represents all of the ordinary humanity, eva suggesting eve of genesis, symbolically the mother of humanity, and smith being a stereotypical working-class surname. thus birling’s ‘huge’ indifference is, symbolically, to the suffering of any human being, particularly those who are his socially inferior. indeed, his estimations of people’s worth have been entirely based on their money or their social connections; early on in the play he attempts at first to threaten the inspector by explicitly ‘warning him that the chief constable, colonel roberts, is an ‘old friend’ of his. birling’s ‘relief’ therefore is that his place in society is not damaged after all – even though it is based on corruption and inhumanity towards whose who are weaker and more socially vulnerable than him. thus birling has learned nothing at all in the play., further, birling is ‘triumphant’ when he decides that the story is nothing more than ‘moonshine’. ‘triumph’ suggests victory and winning – birling’s delight is based on his perception that he will not be in any way held to account for his misdeeds. ‘moonshine’ is a dismissive colloquialism – priestley uses this to emphasise that there is no emotional impact whatsoever on birling for the suffering of eva smith and those whom she represents. this is accentuated by mrs birling’s suggestion that in the morning eric and sheila will be as ‘amused’ as they are. the tragedy of what happened to eva through her circumstances and through the undeserved actions of others is in effect diminished to a joke. priestley ensures that this anticlimactic interpretation of the play’s events by mrs birling is morally repugnant to the audience. the older birlings and gerald are villainesque, antagonistic figures., sheila is partly redeemed from the birling’s self-seeking immorality. sheila’s response to birling’s ‘relief’ is to accuse him of ‘pretending’ that all is well. this accusation of play-acting creates an ironic role-reversal, as though birling is the one childishly refusing to engage with reality, and she becomes the parent-figure who rebukes him for his immaturity. this childishness is not an indication of birling’s innocence, but of his lack of responsibility. sheila is the youthful one in the conversation, but she is the one who is vulnerable to the corruption of her parents, and she lacks meaningful power. partly also because of her gender, she is, like eva, the victim of birling’s philosophy of greed – and yet the awakening of her moral awareness is presented as a coming-of-age epiphany. she learns to reject the selfishness and inhumanity of her parents as she realises that all the working-class are intrinsically human beings. she absorbs the relatively complex moral didacticism the inspector represents with regards to the interconnectedness of human society. this is particularly shown by her quoting the exact words of the inspector’s apocalyptic list of consequences if the rich fail to heed the social situation: she quotes his words of ‘fire and blood and anguish’. although she shows no explicit awareness of the social apocalypse of which the inspector warns, she recalls what ‘he made me feel’. her emotional engagement is presented in ironic juxtaposition with her parents’ emotional disengagement. priestley redeems her partly to show the morally repugnant nature of the birlings’ lack of redemption, through juxtaposing their response with hers., the unrepentant birlings are presented by priestley as grotesque not only through their failure to realise their wrong-doing, but also, and more importantly in their seeking of moral superiority over eva smith and the workers she represents. the callous self-righteousness they exhibit is best portrayed in mrs birling’s rhetorical question, ‘why shouldn’t we’ when sheila asks how they possibly can continue as they were before. the fact she considers the question to need no actual answer indicates her moral blindness – it indicates her assumption that the rightr of the powerful to abuse the poor is irrefutable and self-evident. priestley, through the drama, shows how society creates moral indifference to the working-class., the superficiality is also epitomised in gerald’s statement that ‘everything is all right now.’ this bland cliché becomes ironically extremely emotive for the audience as we know that the lack of a moral compass for the birlings and gerald means that others will be treated just as eva was. the superficiality of this analysis has great dramatic power to repulse the audience – and perhaps to begin to effect the social change priestley desired., the third and final ‘ending’ is mysterious. at one level, it satisfies the audience’s hope that there will be justice for eva. by instructing the actors to look ‘guiltily’ around, priestly ensures that the moral indifference of the second ending is not the concluding note of the play. birling speaking on the phone when the person has ‘rung off’ indicates also that his social authority is over; creating the sense that there is justice has lost what he really cared about. the inspector’s semi-comical surname, ‘goole’ also seems relevant right at the play’s climax. there is the suggestion that he did indeed in some way represent supernatural forces intervening in the birlings’ lives to bring justice for eva. however, the play by its nature ends inconclusively. in effect, we are left on a cliffhanger wondering what the ‘real’ police inspector will do. perhaps this reflects priestley’s aim for the audience to think about the play’s social message. the ending of ‘an inspector calls’ is a strong statement of the responsibility of those who seek money and social rank at the expense of humanity. it is strongly didactic and powerful., check this essay.

There are drastic differences that are seen in people who are born in different generations. One may argue that the younger generations are more impressionable and naive while the older generations are very hardheaded and assertive. By creating characters like Sheila and Eric with a large age gap between Mr. and Mrs. Birling in the play An Inspector Calls, tension is created through their differences clashing. J.B. Priestley’s use of contrasting characterization within the Birling family in the play An Inspector Calls creates tension and communicates his theme that one must take into consideration the consequences of their actions and take responsibility for them.

The Birling’s children, Erica and Sheila, are presumed to be very naive and still listening and agreeing with their parent’s words due to their ages. Yet, thought the play both Eric and Sheila prove to be mentally mature and responsible while directly reflect the inspector’s message. Eric Birling was caught up in the complicated situation relating to the death of Eva Smith through his role in impregnating her. Although he is ashamed, he steps up to the plate and confesses his actions and even admits to the fact that “I wasn’t in love with her or anything”, yet he understands that his actions did produce consequences and he takes responsibility for them. He insists on giving her enough money to keep her going, even though it included stealing money from his father (Priestley 50). This action was done unjustly, yet it shows how determined Eric was in order to fix his mistake and take responsibility for his actions- exactly what the Inspector teaches. Sheila Birling, the sister of Eric, also starts out by admitting to her role in the death of Eva. She expresses her sorrow and regret for her actions stating how “It was my own fault… and if I could help her now, I would” right away (24-25). Even though she did not take action like Eric did, she still takes responsibility for her actions and shows that she really does care about the consequences she was unable to attend to. As the play continues and everyone finds out that inspector Goole was a fake, the parents of Sheila and Eric both start to downplay the events of that evening. Suddenly the tension starts to rise as soon as the children speak directly against their parents stating “if you must know it’s you two who are being childish” (55). Sheila is so disgusted by the actions of her parents, that her character takes an unpredictable turn and she evolves into a brave young woman annoyed enough to scold her own parents. Even Eric states directly to his parents that “well, I don’t blame you. But don’t forget i’m ashamed of you as well. Yes- both of you” (54). The characters Sheila and Eric create tension in the play through their differences regarding their view on taking responsibility that contrasts greatly with their parents. The fact that the younger generation is standing up to the older generation and doing unconventional actions like scolding them, the main theme of the novel is clearly represented.

The older generation in the Birling family consists of strong characters: unlikely to sway in their ideas easily, hard headed, and arrogant. Arthur too is confronted about his dealings with Eva Smith, but immediately states that “the girl has been causing trouble in the works. I was quite justified (19). Here, he is seemingly ok knowing that she was forced to kill herself all because of something that started out with him originally and a sign of regret is not to be found. The younger generation, prominently Sheila is verbally pointing out her contrasting viewpoint directly saying (to Mr. Birling) “I think it was a mean thing to do” (21). Tension is created as a result of her comment, but in a way she forces her father to re-examine at his actions by him hearing an opposite viewpoint and internally contemplate her and the Inspector’s message. Another situation that increases the tension overall is when Sheila hears her father describe Eva as cheap labour, and automatically she jumps in stating “but these girls aren’t cheap labour – they’re people” clearly showcasing the differences in the mindset of the two generations (19). Lastly, Mrs. Birling gets confronted with her mistake and does admit to her actions. Her arrogance shows through when she plainly lays out her thoughts to the inspector that “if you think you can bring any pressure to bear upon me, Inspector, you’re quite mistaken. Unlike the other three, I did nothing I’m ashamed of or that won’t bear investigation… You have no power to change my mind” and like Mr. Birling does not have a hint of regret in her (44). Sybil Birling is blinded to the problems within her household and herself, and therefore tension is created when she directly contradicts the viewpoints of her children. The theme of the play is brought out because of this, when the children start to argue their point about accepting responsibility for their actions’ consequences.

Through tension between the characters, the main theme that we don’t live alone, are members of one body, and are responsible for each other is revealed. Sadly for this to be revealed, tension is built greatly dividing the Birling family- the younger vs the older generation. The children desperately try to get their parents to accept what they believe is the inspector’s lesson and purpose for visiting, yet Arthur and Sybil are set on the idea that they are just “the famous younger generation who know it all. And they can’t even take a joke” (72). Although it may be true that the inspector is not real and the older generation will never learn, the main theme is being communicated successfully to the audience. By looking at Mr. and Mrs. Birling and the way they instigate an attack on themselves by their children, the audience feels disgusted by them and the theme reaches the audience.

• TOP CATEGORIES
• AS and A Level
• University Degree
• International Baccalaureate
• Uncategorised
• 5 Star Essays
• Study Tools
• Study Guides
• Meet the Team

An Inspector Calls Themes

Read about the common themes in An Inspector Calls in our theme analysis and examples of student work.

The shadow of World War hangs over the play. Priestley himself served in the 1st World War, the play was written during the 2nd World War and, when the play was first being performed in the late 1940s and in the 1950s, the audience would be aware of the threat of a 3rd World War. When the Inspector warns of “fire and blood and anguish”, there is no doubt what he means. The play makes connections between the exploitation of the weak and vulnerable within society and the impending dangers to civilisation itself. Mr Birling’s prediction of a peaceful 1940 is deliberately absurd; for Britain, once France had requested an armistice with Nazi Germany, this was the lowest point of the war, a nation on its own facing defeat.

Essays About War

JB Priestly wrote 

'An Inspector Calls' is based in 1912, before the first and second world war, before the sinking of the Titanic and before women had any rights.

Responsibility

The Inspector’s mission is to make the characters accept responsibility for their actions in relation to Eva Smith. He arrives at the precise moment when Mr Birling is preaching a principle of individualism: ... “A man has to mind his own business and look after himself and his own.” The Inspector clearly contradicts this view when, in his final speech, he states: “We don’t live alone. We are members of one body. We are responsible for each other.” His message has a real impact on Sheila and Eric- the younger generation. Priestley cannot have known that Margaret Thatcher, British prime minister throughout the 1980s, would uncannily echo Mr Birling’s words when she famously proclaimed “There is no such thing as society.” She said that in 1987; Priestley died in 1984.

Essays About Responsibility 

How does Priestley explore the theme of social responsibility in his play An Inspector Calls?

The apportioning of blame and responsibility are central themes in 'An Inspector Calls'.

Gender Roles

Mrs Birling holds a traditional view of marriage for her daughter, Sheila – a suitable marriage is what all young women should aim for. She takes no interest in Mr Birling’s business and is blissfully ignorant of her son’s drinking. Sheila shows much more independence of spirit in relation to her fiancé, Gerald. The ways in which both Gerald and Eric exploit Eva Smith sexually reveal the powerlessness of women – especially if they were poor – at the time. Women over 21 could not even vote until 1928! For girls like Eva a fall into prostitution was a very real prospect. With almost no access to birth control her pregnancy would be all too common, as would be her suicide.

Essays About Gender Roles

Relationship between men and women in An Inspector Calls

An Inspector Calls by J.B. Priestly - In this essay, I will examine, compare, and contrast the roles of the three women in the play.

When the National Theatre in London famously revived the play in the 1990s, their stage set made clear the play’s symbolist intentions. The Birlings’ house stood at the back of the stage surrounded by children of the future, who were sitting in judgement on their actions. By the time of the Inspector’s exit in Act Three the house has collapsed into rubble. The Inspector could therefore be seen as a kind of time traveller. H.G. Wells, who wrote The Time Machine in 1895 is mentioned in Act One. It is Sheila who first senses that the Inspector seems to know everything. The National Theatre version showed him quite clearly coming from the future to judge the past. Indeed no crime can be investigated. The only criminal, strictly speaking, is Eva herself, since suicide was illegal in 1912. It is the moral consequences of people’s actions that the Inspector is concerned with. Setting the play in 1912, the year when Titanic sank, is Priestley’s way of ridiculing the idea of inevitable human progress without moral improvement. His first audiences in Blitz-shattered London would have clearly understood his message. The play is not therefore a straightforward detective thriller. It should be viewed symbolically, not naturalistically.

Essays About Symbolism

How does priestly make 'an inspector calls' a dramatic play?

'How does J.B. Priestly convey his message in an Inspector Calls?'

• Science & Math
• Sociology & Philosophy
• Law & Politics

The Portrayal of Women in An Inspector Calls

• The Portrayal of Women in…

In An Inspector Calls, J. B. Priestley highlights socialist ideas and ideals through the representation and treatment of woman in the play. The upper-class women within 1912 society are shown to be respected and wealthy—obedient by their husbands. However, the women of the lower classes are neglected and abused by men of the higher class.

One of the most important ways women are presented in An Inspector Calls is through the portrayal of Eva’s vulnerability in the workplace. Eva Smith works for Mr Birling, a businessman that owns a factory which employs many people of the lower class. Eva Smith is fired from Birling’s factory after stirring up trouble and demanding increased pay due to unfair wages. “She’d had a lot to say- far too much- so she had to go.”.

This shows the ruthless behaviour of Mr Birling as he shows no compassion or understanding of her situation and states that she could “go work somewhere else.” The fact that she is considered to have had “too much to say” represents how women of this class lacked a “voice” in society.

Another way J. B. Priestley reveals how women are treated in An Inspector Calls is shown through Gerald’s interview with the Inspector. He depicts his encounter with Daisy Renton in detail. He met her in a bar, while she is cornered by an older fat man called Joe Maggerty. He describes the bar as a “favourite haunt of women of the town”. This eludes to the women at this establishment being prostitutes.

It is degrading and insulting. He also describes the women as “dough faced and hard eyed”. Through this disrespectful language, it reveals Gerald’s demeaning view of women. In addition to this, the description of how she was cornered by Joe Maggerty’s “fat carcass” shows the exploitation that women experienced from supposedly “respectable” men.

Another way that women are shown to be mistreated is through Eric’s attitude towards Daisy Renton. One night, he uses his strength and power to overcome her in an abusive manner. He states, “I was in a state when a chap easily turns nasty and I threatened to make a row”.

This suggests that this behaviour was the result of being intoxicated and implies that this behaviour would have been commonplace during this time. While the inspector interrogates Eric, he states that Eric “Used her for the end of a stupid, drunken evening, as if she was an animal, a thing, not a person.” The use of this simile clearly highlights the way women are treated like objects.

In addition, Priestley also shows the prejudice present within society. As a respected, well known women of the upper class, Mrs Birling is assertive and powerful, but she is also lacking compassion which is suggested in the stage directions which describe her as “cold”. The fact that she is a member of the “Brumley Women’s Charity Organization” demonstrates that she wants to be portrayed ostensibly to the community as a feminist and an advocate.

However, we soon discover that Mrs Birling is hypocritical and that unmarried women are unfairly judged by members of the upper classes. This is seen when Mrs Birling states to a girl seeking help that she should “Go look for the father of the child. It’s his responsibility.” This shows Mrs Birling’s elitist nature and how callous her demeanour is. She discriminates against the girl because she is a single mother with a child out of wedlock.

Despite this negative portrayal of women, J.B Priestley uses the character of Sheila to give some hope for the future as he highlights the way in which Sheila grows and develops in the play. This is very important because at the very beginning of the play Sheila is very childlike and needing of her parents’ approval. Sheila’s development is also evident in the way her language matures.

At the start of the play, she is submissive and states “Yes, go on, Mummy”. The word Mummy has very childlike connotations. By the end of the play, however, she states “Now, Mother – don’t you see”. This is especially important as it indicates that she has become a more confident individual with independent ideas and strong morals.

This is also ironic as despite being a member of the younger generation, she demonstrates far more insight than the older leaders of the family, Mr and Mrs Birling, who are very antiquated and don’t care what the Inspector says to them.

Related Posts

• Canadian History: Women's Voting Rights
• Women in Ancient Greek Sport
• Women In Combat
• Roman Women
• 'An Inspector Calls' Themes: Money and Power

Author:  William Anderson (Schoolworkhelper Editorial Team)

Tutor and Freelance Writer. Science Teacher and Lover of Essays. Article last reviewed: 2022 | St. Rosemary Institution © 2010-2024 | Creative Commons 4.0

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Post comment

• International
• Schools directory
• Resources Jobs Schools directory News Search

'An Inspector Calls' Grade 9 gender essay

Subject: English

Age range: 16+

Resource type: Other

Last updated

22 February 2018

• Share through email
• Share through twitter
• Share through linkedin
• Share through facebook
• Share through pinterest

Tes paid licence How can I reuse this?

Your rating is required to reflect your happiness.

It's good to leave some feedback.

Something went wrong, please try again later.

This resource hasn't been reviewed yet

To ensure quality for our reviews, only customers who have purchased this resource can review it

Report this resource to let us know if it violates our terms and conditions. Our customer service team will review your report and will be in touch.

Not quite what you were looking for? Search by keyword to find the right resource:

Home Essay Examples Literature An Inspector Calls

Representation Of Women In An Inspector Calls?

• Category Literature
• Subcategory Plays
• Topic An Inspector Calls

An Inspector Calls is a play written by English dramatist J.B.Priestley, the play is set in 1912 which talks about the controversies, and the political problems in that era like how women were treated poorly because of their gender or their class and how that era was the opposite from the expectations of people in 1945. This essay will discuss about the unfairness, harsh environment for women and how badly they were treated back in the days.

Priestley portrays women as useless objects to men that are used then thrown away. He also portrays how upper class women are treated differently from working class women, how working class women were always humiliated by everyone around them, Mr.Birling says ‘Giving us the port Edna, that’s right’, this shows how Edna is just a function to all the others and how she talked to was different from others. All of them were just toys in the eyes of men. This were the stereotypes in that era, that were attached to women back in those days. Throughout the play, women were portrayed in different ways from age, class and how they’re presented as very important throughout the act with life lessons and different messages. In the play, Priestley included a long range of female characters showing how he wanted to convey women from different social backgrounds.

Our writers can write you a new plagiarism-free essay on any topic

Priestley wanted to portray his ideas by using different characters to show this in the play. How Mr. Birling states that “She’d had a lot to say – far too much – so she had to go” about Eva Smith. This suggests things such as freedom to speak wasn’t taken seriously when it came to women back in those days. Men thought it was something that wasn’t necessary for women. It is something that Priestley portrays the lack of importance given to women. This is shown in how the character of Edna speaks, “Yes, Ma’am” or when she talked to Birling about the inspector calling, “Please, sir, an inspector called”. The way that she talks was so different from others and how short it is, this shows even more about sexism, also her class and job in that era. How difficult it was for women to actually live and survive around that decade, like how Eva Smith got sacked by Mr Birling “She was one of my employees and then I discharged her”. This is because of his selfishness and his capitalist point of view “Well, it’s my duty to keep labour costs down, and if I’d agreed to this demand for a new rate we’d have added about twelve per cent to our labour costs”, that he denied her request to raise the wages leading to a chain of events that leads to her death later on, this was how working class women were so mistreated back then. Then the way that she called Mr.Birling “Sir”, reminds us even more about how the classes were back then. In certain areas of the play Mr and Mrs.Birling devalues their own daughter’s freedom of speech by “cutting in” when Sheila is trying to make a point. Mr. Birling shows that he does not think Sheila as capable to handle the inspector and wants to try and “settle it sensibly for you ” which he does not offer to do for Gerald or Eric. “I thought it would do us all a bit of good if we tried to put ourselves in the place of these young women”, this quote portrays that if the audience try and understand women they will understand the difficulty that they have to fight through everyday in their lives. The way Priestley uses different ways to portray women, gives us a better look about how women were treated badly, differently, because of their social class and gender.

Women in An Inspector Calls are presented and seen as objects. Mr Birling says “Giving us the port Edna, that’s right”. This represents the invisible working class and how she is only seen like just a thing in the house that serves its owner and the way she is talked to is different from others. Mr Birling says “your engagement to Sheila means a tremendous lot to me”, as like he is looking forward to the time when Crofts and Birlings are no longer competing but are working together. This suggest Sheila’s engagement is actually a business opportunity, rather than a formal agreement to get married. “Just used her”, “As if she was an animal”, was what the Inspector said about Eva Smith. Also she was also described as “young, fresh and charming” by Gerald. This implies that, for them, she was just someone they could amuse with until they can decide whether they still care for the relationship. Gerald gave her shelter then looked after her which shows that he knew she was vulnerable and that she was in need of help, however soon after that he just abandoned her. This shows us how powerful men were in women’s lives regardless of their class. This is another thing that shows us the theme of sexism and how it is presented by the author.

During the play, women are seen as weak, powerless and having no value. Eva Smith is described as “Pretty” and “Good-looking”. Although these are compliments, their memories of her are filled with her physical appearance. During the Edwardian era, women had little to no ways to prove themselves, other than looking good, and making their husbands happy. Gerald said “Miss Birling ought to be excused anymore of this questioning”, as he didn’t do this just to cover up his affair but also women are seen as weaker species to begin with. Also, when Sheila wanted to stay in the room, Gerald said “Why should you? It’s bound to be unpleasant and disturbing”, this phrase made us questioning whether he wanted to protect Sheila or just wanted her out of the room. Mr Birling sees Eva as just one of “several hundred young women” who worked at his factory and nothing more than just a worker who had no value. By saying “they keep changing” he shows the audience that he didn’t even care if he dismissed Eva as she was just cheap labour to him. Therefore, by the victim of the play being a working class female, Priestley highlights the vulnerability of women in those times, something that was socially acceptable.

However, sometimes in the play, women rise up to the level of power equal to the power of the male characters.. The first time the readers see the peak of power is when Sheila said “Don’t interfere please, father” to cut Mr.Birling off mid-sentenced. This shows how brave and strong Sheila is, to even have the guts talking back to her father, even shutting him off in the middle of his speech like that. When the Inspector left, she took over his role , as the voice of the author. She had the authority over all the characters, “Don’t you see?”, “They don’t seem to understand”. She had a point, and people were taking it in, instead of rejecting it, like how all women back in the day were treated. She was defending Eva Smith, fighting against her family and their idea of capitalism and even sexism in some way. How she stood up to protect someone in a lower class. Eva Smith was the one who represented the whole working class with the Inspector saying “Millions and millions of Eva Smith”. She was abused, looked down on, disrespected and not cared for. The theme of responsibility is emphasised when Sheila stood up for a powerless women like her against the harsh society with the idea of capitalism.

In conclusion, women are portrayed not only as emotional but also as very strong, independent and proud of their gender. The play showed the reader that women rely heavily on age, class and look to survive the cruel society back then.   

We have 98 writers available online to start working on your essay just NOW!

Related Topics

Related essays.

By clicking "Send essay" you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

By clicking "Receive essay" you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

We can edit this one and make it plagiarism-free in no time

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Mr Salles Teaches English

Full Mark Essay on Inequality in An Inspector Calls

Full marks: 30/30 from isum arachchige.

Isum kindly donated his essay so that students could learn from it.

Here is a full mark answer. It may surprise you.

It is difficult to read, so I will type out the answer for you if you want to skip ahead:

Most full mark essays are 900 words long, or more.

My experience of top grade students is that they don’t spend long planning. There are no marks for your plan. This plan just jots down the 4 things our student wants to say about Priestley’s point of view. Only he can read it, it is so messy! That’s because he is moving at speed. Points make prizes and the fastest hand wins.

Thesis and Opening Paragraph

In the didactic play ‘An Inspector Calls’, I strongly agree that Priestley constructs the play to convey the message that inequality leads to tragedy.

He tackles inequality between businessmen and working class, to gender inequality to present the flaws present in Edwardian society,

and how these still need to be changed even in contemporary society.

When I set it out this way, you can see that we have a 3 part thesis statement. This gives you 3 of Priestley’s ideas to prove in your essay. It tells the examiner straight away that you will at least be ‘thoughtful’ for Level 5, and possibly ‘convincing’ and ‘perceptive’ for Level 6. This means that, as they read, they are trying to build toward giving you this mark.

Priestley constructs Birling as a proxy for a stereotypical Edwardian Edwardian capitalist to portray his selfish views as flawed, due to his lack of equality.

Birling claims metaphorically that he is a ‘hard headed man of business’. This immediately establishes a capitalist persona of Birling, to then later represent that inequality is due to capitalism.

This perhaps alludes to Stanley Baldwin, as he claimed that capitalists profited from war, and Birling is made to act as a fool as he states that ‘there is nothing to gain and everything to lose by war’, in which the juxtaposition is ironic and he is portrayed as a fool.

Once Priestley establishes Birling as a foolish capitalist, Birling claims that he seeks ‘higher prices’ and ‘lower wages’. This illustrates the immense exploitation of workers from capitalist business men, increasing the wealth gap, producing large economic inequality which eventually leads to a tragedy - Eva’s death.

Capitalism is portrayed to be a source of those actions, as since then Attlee won the labour vote by a landslide majority in 1945.

One of the fascinating bits of research I’ve carried out is what predicts a top grade essay? It has absolutely nothing to do with paragraph structures. I find this really fascinating, because most English departments have a preferred structure. Yet, when I read essays, no student keeps to a paragraph structure under pressure of the exam. And absolutely no top grade student relies on one. This is something I long suspected - the best essay simply has as many explanations as possible to prove its argument. So, these are the 3 things which make the most difference to your grade: The more explanations, the higher your mark. (Isum gives about 40 of these in the whole essay). Therefore, the faster you write - the more words you write - the higher your mark. I teach this as ‘the fastest hand wins the duel’. The more your explanations are about the writer’s point of view, the higher your mark. So, that is why I am laying this essay out this way - one explanation in each paragraph. You wouldn’t write it that way in the exam - although you could. It is just to show you how marks are building up. Notice that the examiner is being cautious in their annotations. They haven’t read my guide to An Inspector Calls, so they know nothing about Stanley Baldwin, and why this is so relevant to an audience in 1945. So, they just treat the context as ‘explained’, Level 3. They get more excited when there is a quote analysis. Notice Isum goes straight in to explaining how this reveals Priestley’s ideas, which is why it is ‘clear understanding’ Level 4.

Thank you for reading Mr Salles Teaches English. This post is public so feel free to share it. You probably have several friends who want to get top grades!

Priestley wanted to boost these changes.

He further promotes this through the dramatic device as we hear a “sharp ring of the door bell” in which the Inspector interrupts Birling’s foolish speech about capitalism, and suggests that his capitalist view has summoned the death of Eva.

Priestley could be portraying these views of Birling as a tool to allow the rich, upper class audience that could afford to watch this play, to reflect upon themselves and evaluate whether they are acting like Birling.

Isum realises that the easiest way to build an argument is to work through the text chronologically. This, by the way, is also the best way to write an argument in the extract questions - deal with the extract chronologically, where it appears in your argument. Now Isum is using more context to back up an interpretation of Priestley’s views, so the examiner has moved the AO3 context mark up to ‘clear understanding’.

Mr Salles Teaches English is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts which help you get top grades, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Furthermore, Priestley conveys the stark gender (in) equality at the time, to convey how men abused their power and exploited women, leading to women being shunned away from society.

Eric claims that he ‘was in that state where a chap turns nasty’. The generalised adjective ‘that’ suggests that this state was common at the time, along with the adjective ‘nasty’ which indicates the abhorrent general behaviour performed towards women at the time.

Priestley constructs this to a regular Edwardian young man who sexually exploits working class women to convey the immense gender inequality at the time.

In fact, when Eric ‘threatened to make a row’, it portrays the fact that Eric had all the power, as if he (were) reported at the time, society would turn a blind eye on Eva due to the misogynistic patriarchal society at the time - rape was not even illegal back then.

Consequently it was Eric’s unsympathetic exploitation which took a part in Eva’s death.

Priestley clearly portrays the lack of responsibility of males leading to tragedy, especially as he (Eric) refers to himself as a ‘chap’ rather than himself, distancing himself from the act he committed.

This is the kind of section of your essay you can plan in advance. If you have this in your memory, you will find it is relevant to every single essay that comes up. Even if the essay is only on Sheila, you will be able to refer to how Priestley contrasts her guilt and responsibility with Eric’s. This is even more certain because you are given a choice of two questions, one of which is always about a theme. It is always easier to get a grade 9 by choosing the theme question, rather than the character question, because it forces you to write about Priestley’s ideas. Although this looks like an extended analysis of a quote, it is actually an extended analysis of the incident, with a range of quotes. This is not a massive What, Where, How, Why paragraph, or any other paragraph technique, exploding a single quote till it dies on the page. It is simply linking lots of explanations in an argument. Because the explanation always uses quotes, it ends up convincing the examiner, so it gets Level 6 for AO2 language analysis. By the way, there are no marks for naming adjectives. And rape was definitely a crime in 1945!

Paid subscribers get my full marking every week, and already have an archive of over 50 posts like these, all at grade 9.

You can read them all for a week and cancel without paying!

Keep reading with a 7-day free trial

Subscribe to Mr Salles Teaches English to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.