Analysing An Inspector Calls: Class, Responsibility and Dramatic Craft
This work has been verified by our teacher: 22.01.2026 at 18:05
Homework type: Analysis
Added: 21.01.2026 at 9:07
Summary:
Explore class, responsibility, and dramatic craft in An Inspector Calls to deepen your understanding of character, themes, and Priestley’s social critique.
An In-Depth Exploration of *An Inspector Calls*: Character Dynamics, Social Responsibility, and Dramatic Techniques
J.B. Priestley’s *An Inspector Calls* occupies a unique place in British drama, skilfully blending social critique, compelling characterisation, and suspenseful theatricality. First performed in 1945, in a world scarred by the devastation of two world wars and on the threshold of the welfare state, Priestley sets his play retrospectively in 1912, a time often portrayed as the last gasp of carefree Edwardian prosperity. The play’s period setting, just two years before the outbreak of the Great War, allows Priestley to hold a mirror up to the social attitudes, class prejudices, and insular morality of early twentieth-century Britain, interrogating issues which resonated profoundly with post-war audiences and remain as urgent today. Through the microcosm of the Birling family and their privileged dinner party, Priestley unravels the façade of respectability to question the ethics of capitalism, expose the limitations of self-interest, and champion a vision of collective responsibility.
This essay will undertake a comprehensive analysis of the principal characters, their development, and their significance, while exploring the play’s thematic concerns, especially social responsibility and class. Furthermore, the essay will examine Priestley’s theatrical craft, including his use of dramatic irony and symbolism, before concluding with a reflection on the play’s enduring contemporary relevance and its value in modern education.
---
I. Historical and Social Context: Setting the Scene
To understand *An Inspector Calls*, it is vital to appreciate the rigid class divisions that defined Edwardian Britain. The Birlings, for example, represent the burgeoning industrialist class—a family rich not through nobility, but through commerce. Behind the gilded security of family-run factories and lavish country homes, Britain in 1912 was fraught with class tension: the suffragette movement was challenging gender roles, trade unions were growing in influence, and social reform was quietly fermenting.Priestley himself, writing for an audience who had just endured the ravages of WWII, used this retrospective setting as a means to highlight both how little had changed, and how vital it was to heed the lessons of the past. His own avowed socialist sympathies infused the play with a sense of moral urgency. The dramatic irony in the story—evident when Arthur Birling confidently dismisses the possibility of war, or proclaims the Titanic unsinkable—serves to expose the complacency and arrogance of his class and era. For the Birlings, social standing is everything: their reputation is their currency, and the spectre of someone like Eva Smith—a young, working-class woman without the ‘buffer’ of family protection—threatens their carefully constructed world.
The play’s setting in 1912 but production in 1945 enables Priestley to interrogate the social attitudes which, in his eyes, led to the tragedies of the twentieth century. The Birlings’ wealth is founded upon the exploitation and invisibility of workers like Eva, a dynamic Priestley invites audiences to question, not simply as a historical curiosity, but as an urgent matter for their own times.
---
II. Character Analysis and Their Roles in Exploring Themes
Arthur Birling: The Capitalist Patriarch
Arthur Birling is, in many respects, the embodiment of Edwardian capitalism. A “hard-headed practical man of business,” he is preoccupied with status and profit, prizing individualism above all else. He describes the idea of social responsibility as “nonsense,” opining that “a man has to make his own way”—a conviction he clings to even as the Inspector reveals the extent of his actions’ consequences. His sacking of Eva Smith for organising a strike over fair wages serves as a pivotal moment. Birling’s inability—or unwillingness—to recognise his culpability highlights Priestley’s critique of a system built on exploitation.Arthur’s bombastic assertions that war will never happen, and that the Titanic is “unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable,” are instances of painstakingly constructed dramatic irony. Priestley uses Birling’s misplaced certainties to position the audience, who know the grim realities to come, as morally and intellectually superior to him. In this sense, Birling embodies the failings of an entire class and era; his stubborn refusal to learn from the Inspector’s revelations hints at the broader social dangers Priestley seeks to expose.
Sybil Birling: The Cold-hearted Matriarch
If Arthur Birling personifies the arrogance of wealth, Sybil Birling exemplifies its social snobbery. She is the chair of a women’s charity, but her intervention in Eva Smith’s application for help is marked not by compassion but by patronising prejudice. Her refusal is based on Eva’s impertinence—the insolence of a working-class girl daring to use the Birling name. Here, Priestley lays bare the hypocrisy of a charitable system predicated on re-affirming social hierarchies rather than alleviating need.Sybil’s interactions with her children further highlight the generational divide. She is quick to shield herself from blame, refusing to acknowledge Eric’s involvement even when confronted with the truth. Her capacity for denial, even in the face of overwhelming evidence, positions her as a symbol of established privilege determined to preserve itself, whatever the human cost.
Sheila Birling: The Journey from Naivety to Awareness
Sheila Birling, at the outset, appears little more than a sheltered and frivolous daughter, her concerns confined to engagement rings and summer fashions. Her jealousy at Milwards, leading to Eva’s dismissal, marks her as a product of privilege—accustomed to getting her way without regard for others. Yet, unlike her parents, Sheila is transformed by the Inspector’s interrogations. She is among the first to accept responsibility, insisting, “I know I’m to blame—and I’m desperately sorry.”This willingness to reflect and repent marks her out as representative of the younger generation’s potential to change. Sheila’s scrutiny of the Inspector’s identity betrays an intelligence and curiosity absent in her parents, but crucially, she does not use the possibility of a ‘hoax’ to evade guilt. In her, Priestley plants the seeds of hope: her openness and moral sensitivity contrast starkly with the stultifying denial of Arthur and Sybil.
Gerald Croft: The Ambiguous Aristocrat
Gerald Croft straddles two worlds: he is the offspring of an aristocratic family and heir to his father’s industrial business, positioning him somewhere between the established upper and nouveau riche. His involvement with Eva Smith—whom he knows as Daisy Renton—invites the audience’s judgement. He offers her comfort, yet the relationship is transactional, marked by unequal power. Gerald’s desire to ‘rescue’ Daisy risks reinforcing the very structures Priestley seeks to critique, yet the genuine warmth complicates our reaction to him.When the Inspector’s visit threatens Gerald’s reputation, he is swift to seek loopholes, attempting to expose the Inspector as an impostor. Unlike Sheila, he is eager to discredit the message if he can discredit the messenger. Ultimately, Gerald is caught between self-interest and conscience, illustrative of the challenges facing the privileged when asked to sacrifice for social good.
Eric Birling: The Troubled Son
Eric, younger and more awkward, is emblematic of a generation wounded by family dysfunction and societal expectation. He is revealed to be shy and dislocated, a heavy drinker—a fact barely acknowledged by his parents. Eric’s relationship with Eva is marked by impulsiveness and immaturity, resulting in an unplanned pregnancy and ultimately theft to support her. His guilt, however, is genuine, and unlike his parents, he confesses fully, declaring that “We did her in, all right.” Eric’s journey towards accepting blame and expressing remorse marks him, alongside Sheila, as a vessel for Priestley’s hope that younger generations might forge a more just society.---
III. Thematic Exploration
Social Responsibility and Collective Morality
The motor of *An Inspector Calls* is the clash between individualism and collective consciousness. Priestley’s central message is that no one lives in isolation; our actions ripple through the lives of others. The Inspector embodies the play’s conscience, warning of the “fire and blood and anguish” awaiting those who ignore this interconnectedness. The contrast between the older Birlings, entrenched in self-justification, and the younger generation’s acceptance of blame, asks the audience to consider their own willingness to recognise responsibility.Class Conflict and Prejudice
Class divides run through every aspect of the play. Eva Smith’s fate is shaped at every turn by her position in the social hierarchy; denied fair wages, dignity in unemployment, compassion in charity, and ultimately hope itself. Through the misuse of charity and the Birlings’ dismissive attitudes, Priestley exposes the hollowness of paternalistic philanthropy. The intersectionality of gender and class is also sharply rendered—Eva faces not only poverty, but the special vulnerability reserved for women who lack social protection.Appearance Versus Reality and Truth
The figure of Inspector Goole is shrouded in enigma—he may be a police inspector, or something more metaphysical, but his function is to reveal uncomfortable truths. The Birlings’ carefully maintained façade is systematically dismantled: secrets are laid bare, lies unravelled. The ambiguous ‘hoax’ at the play’s conclusion forces the characters—and audience—to question whether truth depends upon fact or outcome. Priestley poses the unsettling idea that moral responsibility persists, whatever the technicalities.---
IV. Dramatic Techniques and Structure
Priestley’s play is a model of theatrical economy. The single set, representing the Birling dining room, serves to intensify the claustrophobia as the walls—both emotional and social—close in. The reliance on dialogue over spectacle focuses attention on the evolving relationships and moral predicaments. Dramatic irony is employed relentlessly, undercutting Arthur’s pronouncements and keeping the audience alert to the chasm between appearance and reality.Lighting is cleverly manipulated: the initial “pink and intimate” lighting turns “brighter and harder” with the Inspector’s arrival, symbolising the exposure of concealed truths. The Inspector himself emerges as a symbolic figure—perhaps a supernatural avenger or the personification of ‘Goole’ justice—his authority underscored by stage directions and his effect on other characters.
---
V. The Play’s Relevance and Impact Today
Seventy years on, Priestley’s message has lost none of its force. In a world still beset by inequality, debates about privilege, responsibility, and ethical citizenship remain live. The generational schisms Priestley dramatises are as visible as ever, particularly in contemporary discussions of social justice and climate change. Productions of the play continue to update its setting and presentation, highlighting new points of resonance—be it austerity politics or debates about national identity. For students encountering the play today, *An Inspector Calls* is more than a historical curiosity; it is an invitation to moral reflection and civic engagement, challenging audiences to ask, “What kind of society do we want to build?”---
Conclusion
Through a tightly structured drama, vivid characterisation, and a masterful use of irony and symbol, Priestley crafts a powerful indictment of the complacency and cruelty of his age—an indictment which, pointedly, is meant as much for our own. The journey of the Birlings, summoned from comfort into confrontation with collective guilt, reflects a broader call for empathy, humility, and social responsibility. Ultimately, *An Inspector Calls* is not just a play about a family in crisis, but a clarion call to its audience—both then and now—to reject indifference and embrace the ties that bind us all.To study Priestley’s work is to engage with the pressing moral questions at the heart of social life. As students and citizens, we are challenged to heed the Inspector’s words, and to reflect on what it means to be responsible for one another. This, more than any plot twist or revelation, is the enduring lesson of *An Inspector Calls*.
Rate:
Log in to rate the work.
Log in