An Inspector Calls
Go here for the Litchart! (Excellent guide)
http://www.litcharts.com/lit/an-inspector-calls
*Didactic
*One-dimensional?
*Double coup de theatre (twist at the end when we discover that the Inspector is not a real Inspector but that a new Inspector is on the way)
*Symbolism - the characters could be compared to the characters of Of Mice and Men - they are archetypes, they stand for much wider categories of people.
Birling - the stubborn stiff-necked inflexible middle class
Eva Smith - the exploited working class
*Characterisation is full of contrasts and parallels - the most significant feature of which is the parallel that Priestley wants us to draw between the characters and ourselves. Where do we fit? Are we Sheila or are we more like Eric?
-key words are thrown from character to character, having very different meanings depending on who says them
e.g. "Responsibility"
*Stagecraft - lighting is an important dramatic device, as is ending each act on a cliffhanger
*Static stage - (indebted to Greek principles of drama) - There's only one set throughout and this creates a sense of claustrophobia, reinforcing how everyone is linked and cannot escape from their guilt (or from the sense of coming judgement/being found out/being called to account)
>The implication is that perhaps we live in a goldfish ball too....is the Inspector coming for us?
*Wordplay of GHOUL/Goole - the Inspector is other-worldly, enigmatic, mysterious - could be seen as the voice of God or the voice of our consciences or the voice of the oppressed.
> Crucial for the didactic message of the play
> Could also be seen as a weakness - can Priestley not make his point without resorting to the supernatural?
*Dramatic irony - we know that 'fire and blood and anguish' came in the first and second world war and that the Titanic is far from 'unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable'
*Time is very important, not least the way that as the audience we are watching a historical moment that is distant and removed from us. This makes us perhaps more able to criticise the play for being too one-dimensional. Surely as a 21st century audience we are aware that socialism is no more a perfect system for society than capitalism? Doesn't the 'we are all responsible for each other' mantra strike us as a little too simplistic?
http://www.litcharts.com/lit/an-inspector-calls
*Didactic
*One-dimensional?
*Double coup de theatre (twist at the end when we discover that the Inspector is not a real Inspector but that a new Inspector is on the way)
*Symbolism - the characters could be compared to the characters of Of Mice and Men - they are archetypes, they stand for much wider categories of people.
Birling - the stubborn stiff-necked inflexible middle class
Eva Smith - the exploited working class
*Characterisation is full of contrasts and parallels - the most significant feature of which is the parallel that Priestley wants us to draw between the characters and ourselves. Where do we fit? Are we Sheila or are we more like Eric?
-key words are thrown from character to character, having very different meanings depending on who says them
e.g. "Responsibility"
*Stagecraft - lighting is an important dramatic device, as is ending each act on a cliffhanger
*Static stage - (indebted to Greek principles of drama) - There's only one set throughout and this creates a sense of claustrophobia, reinforcing how everyone is linked and cannot escape from their guilt (or from the sense of coming judgement/being found out/being called to account)
>The implication is that perhaps we live in a goldfish ball too....is the Inspector coming for us?
*Wordplay of GHOUL/Goole - the Inspector is other-worldly, enigmatic, mysterious - could be seen as the voice of God or the voice of our consciences or the voice of the oppressed.
> Crucial for the didactic message of the play
> Could also be seen as a weakness - can Priestley not make his point without resorting to the supernatural?
*Dramatic irony - we know that 'fire and blood and anguish' came in the first and second world war and that the Titanic is far from 'unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable'
*Time is very important, not least the way that as the audience we are watching a historical moment that is distant and removed from us. This makes us perhaps more able to criticise the play for being too one-dimensional. Surely as a 21st century audience we are aware that socialism is no more a perfect system for society than capitalism? Doesn't the 'we are all responsible for each other' mantra strike us as a little too simplistic?
Comments
Post a Comment