Essay About An Inspector Calls

most vulnerable at that time, Mrs Birling refused to aid Daisy Renton, citing her dislike for her mannerism.

In her defense, she denied any wrongdoing and stated "I've done nothing wrong" in regards to Eva Smith's death. Mr. Birling dismissed Eva Smith when she requested a raise, highlighting his inability to handle responsibly. Despite his assurance that she would return to work, she never did. He dismissively stated "She had a lot to say, far too much, she had to go". Though Mr. Birling believes himself to be a shrewd businessman, his actions portray him as a callous one.

The reason for J's behavior towards Eva Smith and the other workers requesting a salary increase was that he fired them, assuming they would return due to financial desperation. However, he did not consider the ramifications of his actions and made an incorrect choice in letting go of the skilled worker Eva. Despite knowing that she was a financially struggling individual, he still terminated her employment. Ultimately, this serves as a demonstration of J's actions.

In his play, B Priestley portrays the upper classes as dreadful and irresponsible. The Inspector's speech towards the end of the play discusses how the affluent families were impacted by both World Wars. He warns that if the wealthy do not extend kindness to others, like those living in poverty or underprivileged countries, it could lead to a catastrophic outcome with violence, anger, bloodshed, and suffering. He holds the Birling family responsible for playing a role in Eva Smith's suicide but asserts that thousands of other people like her are in a similar situation around the world.

Priestley's portrayal highlights the Birling family's

careless and harmful actions towards others, causing chaos and potentially driving others to commit suicide. Their behavior exemplifies negative traits and values of their social class, setting a poor example for the wealthy in 1912. Even after the inspector speaks with them and they realize their wrongdoing, Mr and Mrs Birling remain unchanged. They believe that as long as Eva Smith's death did not directly affect them, they can continue living their lives without addressing their hurtful behavior towards others.

Priestley attempted to demonstrate to the audience that Mr and Mrs Birling were selfish and stubborn because they did not consider giving the lower classes more respect and better care than before the inspector's visit. Even if a high-class individual caused something terrible and they later recognized it may not have happened, it would not alter their values towards life and dealing with others. Gerald's character mirrored the behavior of a wealthy, middle-aged man during 1912 towards various individuals. Women were prohibited from engaging in sexual activity prior to marriage.

However, the majority of men would not approve of such behavior and would seek sexual attention from other sources. Typically, they would charm women from lower classes and offer them material rewards in exchange. These rewards may not be desirable to the wealthy or upper classes, such as old possessions that are no longer desired. Gerald's relationship with Eva illustrates the prevailing attitudes of his class during this time period - men used women for their own pleasure and empowerment. It also highlights the lack of privilege and honor afforded to women compared to men, as men were free to engage in sexual activity prior

to marriage while women were not.

It is likely that men had more opportunities and advantages than women in many areas. Gerald's affair with Eva Smith, who changed her name to Daisy Renton, was not right because he was engaged to Sheila Birling. This was unfair to Sheila, and it was even worse because Gerald had no intention of marrying Eva and did not return her love. This reveals Gerald's lack of kindness and disrespect for women. Despite his feelings for Eva, Gerald could not marry her because they were from different social classes, and such marriages were highly discouraged. Although marrying Sheila was necessary for him because they belonged to the same social class and shared affluent family backgrounds, it was still unfair to Sheila because Gerald did not truly love her.

According to the text, Sheila was a beautiful woman who could be married for show and to maintain appearances. Gerald believed that his life could return to normal once it was revealed that there was no suicide. He also hypothesized that Eva Smith and Daisy Renton might be distinct individuals due to the inspector showing different photographs to different people, indicating that there might be multiple girls involved. This made the inspector seem untrustworthy and led Mr Birling to question his credibility by asking for his name. J.'s point is unclear.

B Priestley conveyed that even men of the middle class were also consumed by pride and self-importance, as exemplified by Gerald's privileged upbringing. Sheila's decision to have Eva dismissed from Millwards' resulted from her perception that Eva was smirking while trying on a hat. To prevent any further humiliation, Sheila threatened the manager that

she would cease patronizing the establishment and close her family's account if Eva was not fired. The manager's compliance with Sheila's request was driven by the significant business her family conducted with the shop.

Hence, it was crucial for him not to lose the wealthy families as his customers due to their significant contribution to his business. This highlights how a handful of affluent households can greatly influence someone's life. Additionally, Eric had a connection with Eva Smith (who he knew as Daisy Renton). Despite using her, they were not engaged in a romantic relationship.

Eric had treated her as a toy and abandoned her when he couldn't marry her due to her lower class status and rejection of his proposal. Though he had initially provided her with funds, she declined further support and soon fell into harsh financial straits upon his departure. "She hadn't a job, she'd no money left," Eric had admitted. Both Sheila and Eric were left feeling deeply ashamed and embarrassed by their actions.

Despite Priestley's attempt to portray a positive image of the higher class of 1912, few of them were actually caring individuals and this came as a surprise to the audience. However, after the inspector's visit, Sheila and Eric demonstrated a significant change in attitude towards their past behavior. They acknowledged their mistakes and expressed regret, with Sheila admitting "I know I'm to blame and I'm desperately sorry". This transformation indicated their potential to learn from their errors. They were determined to treat everyone with respect, including those from lower classes, and promised to behave in a gracious and respectful manner towards all.

The Inspector emphasizes that everyone bears a responsibility

towards others, urging them to act conscientiously and be mindful of how their actions or words can impact others, even in subtle ways. This sentiment aligns with JB Priestley's personal beliefs, as seen through Inspector Goole's character, who serves as a reflection of what Priestley himself would have done in the situation. Through his interactions with the family, Goole aims to evoke feelings of guilt and encourage them to become better individuals who are aware of their actions towards others.

In general, the play is highly impactful as it portrays distinct characters belonging to diverse social classes in 1912 and illustrates their treatment of others based on their social status. Moreover, it highlights the idea that seemingly minor negative actions can accumulate and result in disastrous consequences. Nevertheless, the conclusion of the play radically changes its tone as it transforms into a perplexing mystery for the audience, leaving behind a plethora of unanswered questions.

The audience is left wondering if Inspector Goole was really an inspector or not, but they still question his identity. The play's setting in 1912 may have significance because it was a time of extreme wealth disparity between the rich and poor, which later shifted after the war. The author may have been comparing the attitudes of British citizens before and after the war to emphasize how drastically things changed. J.B Priestley effectively conveys his message to the audience that individuals are responsible for their actions towards others and how they can impact them.

It is demonstrated that any action or spoken word towards another person can impact their life significantly.