The way in which responsibility is dealt with in An Inspector Calls Essay Example

other prior to the strike. Even after their encounter, he still failed to recognize her until shown a photograph by the inspector. Birling then justified her dismissal, stating that she was fired due to her involvement in a strike. He believed he had done nothing wrong, stating, "The girl had been causing trouble in the works. I was completely justified."

Although Birling was the first to meet Eva Smith, I do not blame him as any employer in his position would have taken similar actions. However, his reaction to Eva's death was deeply unsettling as he prioritized covering up the incident to protect his own social standing. JB Priestley conveyed his disagreement with Birling's belief that "a man has to mind his own business and look after himself" through this play. Priestley advocated for mutual assistance and taking responsibility for our actions.

Having been jobless for a couple of months and incapable of generating income, Eva Smith was in a grim predicament. With no reserves and her parents no longer alive, she had nobody to seek help from. These conditions possibly contributed to Eva Smith's choice to end her life.

Eva Smith secures a job as a sales assistant at Milwards, a clothing shop. This job brings her financial stability and allows her to start settling down. Sheila becomes involved in Eva's story when she visits Milwards to try on some hats and dresses. Sheila seeks assistance from Miss Francis, a co-worker at Milwards, in choosing an outfit. After making a selection, Sheila tries on the outfit but is dissatisfied with how it looks on her. She then turns to Miss Francis for guidance on how to wear

it properly.

Miss Francis requests Eva to put on the dress so that Sheila can see how it should be worn. Upon witnessing that the dress suits Eva better, Sheila becomes furious and, driven by jealousy, informs the manager that Eva had displayed rudeness. Sheila further threatens that if Eva Smith were present the next time she visited the shop to purchase clothes, she would promptly leave and cease all future shopping at Milwards. Additionally, she would advise her mother to close their account with the store. By leveraging her influence as a valued customer at Milwards, Sheila manages to secure Eva's release.

Sheila feels a tremendous amount of guilt for having Eva released, much more so than her father. She expresses her feelings by saying "I felt terrible about it initially, and now I feel even worse." Eva's second dismissal is even more detrimental to Sheila than when she was dismissed by Birling.

Sheila's actions have led to additional downfall in Eva's existence, however, we generally hold her less accountable due to her repentance. Contrasting with Arthur who dismissed Eva without any second thoughts, Sheila acted out of rage and envy but instantly felt remorseful. Her words "It's the only time I've ever done anything like that, and I'll never, never do it again to anybody," seem sincere. J.B. Priestly's intention is to evoke such response from his viewers - he desires people to experience empathy and compassion for each other.

Upon reflection, it could be argued that Sheila bears more responsibility than her father. While Sheila demonstrates greater remorse than Arthur, the motives behind her actions in getting Eva fired are less justified. Birling viewed Eva as

a troublemaker who had the potential to disrupt his production. In contrast, Sheila's decision to have her dismissed was driven by her own temper and jealousy, which is a less legitimate cause.

Gerald Croft encounters Eva, who goes by the name Daisy Renton. Eva changes her name for a fresh start in life. At this point, Daisy is destitute and contemplates engaging in prostitution. It is important not to condemn her for this because she is impoverished and requires assistance. Gerald encounters Daisy at the Palace theatre, where Alderman Meggarty is harassing her. He saves her and persuades her to accompany him for a conversation. Daisy agrees, and Gerald discovers that she is desperate and in need of a place to stay. Consequently, he permits her to reside at Morgan Terrace.

After a few days, he exploits her and establishes her as his mistress. Daisy deeply loves him, but he does not reciprocate those feelings. When he eventually ends the relationship with Daisy, she is deeply hurt and unsure of what to do. Despite feeling genuine remorse, Gerald fails to acknowledge his obligations towards Daisy or the repercussions of his behavior. This absence of love leaves Daisy feeling hopeless, and she returns to the world of prostitution once again.

Although Gerald likely cared for Daisy, their relationship had no potential due to class differences. Gerald, the son of Lord and Lady Croft, was expected to marry someone from a similar social class. This was particularly significant in the early 1900s. Even Arthur Birling, who himself felt socially inferior, hinted at a potential knighthood to enhance his own status.

I believe that Gerald should be more accountable than Arthur and

Sheila combined as he leaves Daisy in a more dire situation. Not only is she without a home, but she is also devastated. Neither Arthur nor Sheila have any personal connections to Daisy. Furthermore, Gerald's comment about protecting young women from unpleasant and disturbing things is deeply hypocritical. His treatment of Daisy contradicts his statement entirely. It seems that he believes women of lower class do not deserve such protection and care. This mindset was commonly held among wealthy young men during that era.

Daisy goes back to prostitution at the Palace Theatre instead of seeking another job. It is there that she encounters Eric, who is intoxicated. He insists on accompanying her home and they engage in sexual activity. Subsequently, Daisy learns that she is pregnant. However, she declines Eric's proposal for marriage because she understands that he does not love her. Despite having limited finances, Eric attempts to provide support for Daisy. But as soon as he depletes his own funds, he resorts to stealing money from his father, Arthur Birling. Upon discovering that the money is stolen, Daisy refuses to accept it and cuts off all communication with Eric.

While both Gerald and Eric were sexually involved with Daisy, their intentions and actions varied greatly. Gerald truly cared for Daisy, providing her support and care over a certain duration. However, Eric exploited her in a single drunken incident. Moreover, this encounter led to Daisy's pregnancy - an event of greater significance in past times than it is today. As a result, Daisy now bears the obligation of not only looking after herself but also her unborn child. The pregnancy has further complicated matters by

halting her profession as a prostitute, leading to homelessness and starvation.

Eric voices regret for his conduct, but it doesn't justify his actions. Although he's not entirely culpable for her suicide, I am of the opinion that he bears a substantial part of the fault as he deceived her. Nonetheless, we must remember she had the choice to wed him and in the end, chose not to. He tried providing financial help to her yet she refused additional ill-gotten money. Maybe Daisy ought to have entertained his proposal of assistance.

Eva has the option of seeking assistance from the Brumley Women's Charity Organisation. However, Mrs. Birling, a member of the organization, declines to help her because Eva has used the name Birling as an alias. Mrs. Birling doubts the validity of Eva's claims and is frustrated that Eva has referred to herself as Miss Birling. Mrs. Birling, known for her strict and snobbish nature, prioritizes her own interests over others. Being a prominent figure in the charity organization, she influences other committee members to also deny Eva aid. Sybil Birling, characterized as arrogant and domineering, displays little compassion by refusing aid and convincing others to do the same.

Despite being the chairwoman of a charity aimed at assisting individuals, her approach is seen as disingenuous because she fails to support those who are genuinely in need. She instructs Eva to "seek out the child's father and hold him responsible," implying that Eva's situation is not deserving of assistance and that individuals should take responsibility for resolving their own problems rather than relying on others. Displaying a lack of concern, she staunchly believes that she has not committed any

wrongdoing, boldly stating to the inspector, "I take no responsibility for it whatsoever." Possessing an undisturbed conscience, she firmly believes in the righteousness of her judgment, confidently asserting, "I have nothing to be ashamed of or anything that cannot withstand scrutiny."

Despite her tough personality and willingness to confront the inspector, she is so determined to shift the blame that she ends up accusing her own son for Eva's downfall. In addition, she deflects responsibility by blaming Eva and even Arthur for initiating the events. She never acknowledges her own actions and does not hold herself accountable at any point.

Mrs. Birling, in my opinion, should bear the responsibility for Eva's death. Had the aid organization provided assistance, guidance, and compassion, Eva might not have felt so hopeless about her future, potentially avoiding her tragic decision to end her life. It appears that she took such drastic measures because she perceived no prospects for herself and her child following the charity's refusal to help.

Arthur is the character who I believe bears the least responsibility. He had to remove Eva from his business for the sake of its success. He viewed her as a troublemaker and it was his duty to maintain order and efficiency. Given the circumstances, his actions were likely justifiable, as the well-being of the employees was not taken into account.

I believe that Mrs. Birling is the most terrible character due to her heartless thoughts, which magnify the severity of her actions. She adamantly refuses to acknowledge any wrongdoing and, even though she is shocked by Eric's involvement, she never displays genuine sorrow. Instead, she believes her behavior was acceptable and fulfilling her "duty"

by rejecting a claim from someone she deemed undeserving. She represents the typical type of women involved in charitable societies during that time. Priestly criticizes them for joining committees not out of a sincere desire to help, but rather to ease their own consciences.

The younger generation, Eric and Sheila, demonstrate genuine remorse for their actions, unlike their parents from the older generation. J.B Priestly employs this to convey an overall message to readers that change will originate from the young rather than the old. Additionally, he holds the belief that all individuals are equal and should not mistreat one another. He aspires for life after the Second World War to surpass its prior state, urging readers to comprehend this and contribute towards creating a better world.