More handpicked essays just for you.
Priestley's ideas in an inspector calls
Priestleys main criticism in an inspector calls
Priestley's ideas in an inspector calls
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the play ‘An Inspector Calls’ it is clear that Priestly uses all of the characters to relay a message to the audience, the Inspector included. Although he initially appears nothing more than an ordinary inspector, he soon proves to be something more mysterious and enigmatic. None of the Birlings have committed a crime, but the Inspector questions their morality and contradicts Birling’s speech about only looking after yourself.
Upon entering into the Birlings’ cosy family get together, it is assumed that, as Mr Birling is a magistrate, the Inspector wants nothing more than a warrant. However, he makes it clear that he is there to investigate a ‘crime’ that he knows the Birlings are linked to. He has photographs and details of the victim, and begins to question them in a methodical manner; ‘One person and one line of inquiry at a time...’. He also refuses a glass of port as he is ‘on duty’, and is very professional; he is methodical and logical as he questions their motives.
However, it emerges that he is something more than an ordinary inspector when he his refusal to be intim...
How Priestly Uses the Characters to Represent His Own Views on Society The play "An Inspector Calls" is set in 1912 but was written in 1945. Edwardian society at that time (1912) was strictly divided into social classes and over two-thirds of the nation's wealth was in the hands of less than 1% of the population. Below the very rich were the middle classes (doctors and merchants, shop workers and clerks), after that came the craftsmen and skilled workers. At the very bottom of the social ladder was the largest class of all - the ordinary workers and the poor, many of whom lived below the poverty level. The men of industry treated the workers very badly and they were paid pittance.
The play is set in three scenes. The entire play is set in the dining
A Comparison of Characters of Mr. Birling and Inspector Goole in J.B. Priestley's An Inspector Calls
JB Priestley’s intent in ‘An Inspector Calls’ was to convey the attitudes of socialism to the minds of the society in the Edwardian Era as he was a passionate believer of the concept. Priestley has attempted this through the employment of ‘Inspector Goole’ in the play. In the play drama is displayed through a variety of methods for the interest of the audience and the communication of personal views from JB Priestley.
Priestley’s Main Aim in An Inspector Calls JB Priestly wrote ‘An Inspector Calls’ to enhance the message that ‘we don’t live alone. We are members of one body. We are responsible for each other’. This is something Priestly felt strongly about and he succeeded in representing his views through the character of the Inspector in the play itself. He wanted to communicate the message that our actions, no matter how small or seemingly insignificant, always affect others.
The play is the tale of a rich family, that are accosted by a man
The Inspector, straight form his introduction, is commanding and authoritative. Upon his entrance he creates, “…at once an impression of massiveness, solidity and purposefulness.”(PG.11) The Inspector continues to create this impression as he progresses through his speeches and through his interrogation of the family. The Inspector remains confident, sturdy and composed, while people around him crumble and fall to pieces. His ‘solidity’ is proven by the fact he remains on task despite numerous attempts from Birling to digress from the points he is making. The Inspector is told to appear ‘purposeful’; this is shown where he explains to Birling that Birlings way of thinking “Every man must only look out for himself,” is not the case, and all warps of society are interlinked. The view is best illustrated in the Inspectors final speech, where he says, “We don't live alone. We are members of one body. We are responsible for each other.”(p.56). This idea is one that Priestley, himself believed in deeply, and many of Priestleys writing shared this very theme.
When the interviewee said “I went diagonally across the street”, the officer said “you went straight across the street”, and the interviewee agreed and changed her statement. Then the officer directly plants the idea in the victim’s memories that the two young people we men, directly after the victim said she did not know their gender. The “description of the suspect” continued on with the officer planting false information in the statement. The officer asked the closed-ended question of “was it a bright day, the sun was shining?” instead of the open-ended question of “how was the weather”. The officer did use proper open-ended questions regarding the clothing of the suspect. During the reenactment of the crime scene, the officer once again feeds his own narrative by planting the idea that the interviewee hit her elbow on the side of the car when, she truly did not know. The officer was cognoscenti of his proxemics and the audience can see that when the interviewee became emotional, the officer came closer to her and leaned
Eva Smith but the members of the Birling family all had a part to play
Because police investigators are usually under pressure to arrest criminals and safeguard the community, they often make mistakes. Sometimes, detectives become convinced of a suspect 's guilt because of their criminal history or weak speculations. Once they are convinced, they are less likely to consider alternative possibilities. They overlook some important exculpatory evidence, make weak speculations and look only for links that connect a suspect to a crime, especially if the suspect has a previous criminal record. Picking Cotton provides an understanding of some common errors of the police investigation process. During Ronald Cottons interrogation, the detectives did not bother to record the conversation “But I noticed he wasn 't recording the conversation, so I felt that he could be writing anything down”(79) unlike they did for Jennifer. They had already labelled Ronald Cotton as the perpetrator and they told him during the interrogation “Cotton, Jennifer Thompson already identified you. We know it was you”(82). Jenifer Thompson 's testimony along with Ronald Cotton 's past criminal records gave the detectives more reason to believe Ronald committed the crime. Ronald Cotton stated “ This cop Sully, though, he had already decided I was guilty.”(84). Many investigative process have shortcomings and are breached because the officials in charge make
He wanted to give everyone a choice. Should we go back to the way it
In the play “An inspector calls” by J.B priestly, Mr Birling and Shelia Birling have contrasting attitudes to social issues. The author uses this to difference to highlight the diversity between generations and their reaction to situations faced. Arthur Birling is the father to Shelia Birling and is presented as the old fashion generation whereas Shelia is the young generation, who is more aware of the responsibility she has towards other people.The play begins with Mr birling and his family celebrating the engagement of Shelia and Gerald. The atmosphere is happy and light-hearted. Before the inspector arrives, Mr Birling is happy with life and himself “It’s one of the happiest nights of my life.” This shows that Mr Birling is quire selfish because he only thinks that it is one of the happiest nights of his life and not of Shelia and Gerald.
Sheila Birling is another character in ?An Inspector Calls? who also points this out during the play, ?You fool- he knows. Of course he knows. And I hate to think how much he knows that we don?t know yet. You?ll see. You?ll see.?
J.B Priestley use of Sheila Birling to Convey His Message to the Audience in An Inspector Calls
It is not clear in the play whether the inspector is a real person, or