Model essay An Inspector Calls

How does Priestley sustain the interest of his audience in An Inspector Calls?

‘That was the police… A girl has just died on her way to the infirmary. And a police officer is on his way…to ask some questions……’

Priestly uses an abundance of techniques to sustain his audience’s interest, the most dramatic of which is the double coup de theatre at the end of the play. This technique is particularly effective as it does not only surprise and grab the audience’s attention but it also ensures that the audience will continue thinking about the socialist message of the play long after the curtain has fallen.

Priestley unsettles our expectations of the genre of the play with his double twist at the end. We have assumed since the beginning that we are watching a crime mystery where the main interest will be in discovering who is responsible for the crime. Priestley uses the characterisation of Inspector Goole as an enigmatic godlike figure to bring the audience much closer to the central questions of the play. Once we discover that the Inspector was not a real Inspector, the parallels between him and God which have already been established by his masterly questioning and biblical language (‘Fire, blood and anguish’) become inescapable. Thus, the play reaches its didactic climax and the audience are forced to consider for themselves whether they are abiding by the Inspector’s stark political creed or not (‘We are members of one body. We are responsible for one another’). Suddenly we can no longer see the play as about one family in 1912, it is clearly just as relevant its audience in its political and social implications. This is highly intriguing but could also be seen as a controversial and not entirely successful technique. It is possible to view the play as being too one-dimensional in its emphasis on one political viewpoint and indeed received a ‘cool, hostile’ reception when it was first performed in 1945.

Priestley also employs dramatic irony throughout the play to sustain the audience’s interest. This is notable in the opening scene, where there are heavy hints that all is not well with the Birling family. Sheila refers to Gerald’s telling absence, leading us to suspect that he may well have been unfaithful to her (‘Last summer when you never came near me’). Mr Birling seems to be trying too hard to impress, revealing his insecurities and makes outrageously incorrect statements about the Titanic ‘unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable’. The lighting changes abruptly from ‘pink, intimate’ to ‘brighter, harder’ when the Inspector enters, again creating tension and the expectation that the Inspector will drastically transform the family’s outlook and future. While our interest is genuinely aroused by these techniques at the beginning, some audience members may find the approach to be too heavy-handed. The audience of 1945 were well aware that the Titanic sank catastrophically in 1912 and thus Mr Birling’s views portray him to be dangerously deluded. At the same time however, the Titanic disaster cannot reasonably be compared to socially unjust business policies and so certain audience members may feel that Mr Birling is being caricatured rather than fairly represented.

Priestley also uses contrast and symbolism to sustain our interest. Throughout there is clear juxtaposition of the younger generation who are willing to see the error of their ways and repent, adopting the Inspector’s creed of responsibility and social action with the older generation who are arrogant and inflexible. Sheila undergoes the most dramatic transformation of all, resolving to be different in the way she thinks about society and her own role in it. She voices the idea that the identity of the Inspector is immaterial – the truth of the family’s actions is what counts, ‘It doesn’t matter who it was who made us confess,’ ‘Between us we drove that girl to commit suicide’. Priestley also uses symbolism to widen the impact of the story that is told on stage – Eva Smith representing the worker class women who were mistreated in his day and Inspector Goole representing the voice of our consciences or perhaps the voice of God. This is effective but it is also the place where Priestley risks losing his audience, particularly a modern audience. In 2015, far fewer people believe in divine judgement when they die – does this mean they will be less likely to respond to Priestley’s message than his original audience?

Timing – curtain falling – inspector entrances and exits.

In conclusion, An Inspector Calls is a thought-provoking play with much to interest the audience. As Sheila says, once the play is over we are aware that there is much to think about, particularly in terms of its didactic message – as surprising and entertaining as the play may be in parts, ‘it (is) anything but a joke.’