In my work on J. B Priestley’s ‘An Inspector Calls’, I am looking for evidence on who the inspector is. I believe that Priestley didn’t want us to know for sure the identity of the inspector; he just wanted us to speculate. First of all, I believe he could be a spirit, moreover, a ghoul. The definition of a ghoul in the dictionary is ‘a spirit interested in morbid things’. The fact his name is Inspector Goole, a homophone of ghoul, provides more evidence that he could be a ghoul.
The fact he keeps bringing up the horrible images of ‘burnt her inside out, of course’ and ‘she died in great agony’ prove that he is very morbid. I think it has definitely been proved that he is a time traveller. He knew that Eva Smith would drink disinfectant even before she had drunk it. The phone call at the end of the play proves this is the case, e.
g. ” A girl has just died, on the way to the infirmary, after swallowing some disinfectant. ” Plus, when he came into it, it seemed that he already knew everybody’s involvement in the case, he just wanted them to admit this for themselves.For example, Shelia says “why-you fool-he knows..
. ”. Also, he may possess magical powers, because in the film adaptation, they trap him in a room, then when they go to confront him, he has disappeared. There is one thing we know about him for sure, however. We know that he is definitely not a police inspector, as Gerald asks a police sergeant and asks about the inspector, the sergeant swears there isn’t an inspector Goole on the force, e.
g. “He swore there wasn’t any Inspector Goole... ” This moreover proves he is definitely a liar.Also, I believe there is a possibility that the inspector is the ghost of Eva Smith, or perhaps, her unborn child.
I think this because the inspector knows every detail about Eva, much more detail than you would get from glancing at a diary. Plus he seems to know the feelings that she had deep down within herself, which you would only know if you were the person yourself, or connected to them, e. g. “she went away, to be alone, to be quiet, to remember all that had happened between you” J.B Priestley was also using the play as a sort of play rights mouthpiece to convey his thoughts and feelings and what he thought was wrong with the world, as in the oppression of the working class, Eva Smith, and the riches and wealth commanded by the upper class, the Birlings. Priestley himself was a socialist reformer.
For example, “we can’t let these Bernard Shaws and H. G. Wellses do all the talking”. Bernard Shaw was a controversial playwright of the time who Priestley was against and Wells was a controversial author.In some way, I also believe he is almost being an angel, or to a lesser extent, God. He suddenly turns up, knows everybody’s involvement in the case before Eva Smith has even drank the disinfectant, knows all of Eva’s feelings, and suddenly disappears when the Birlings have him trapped in a room and go to confront him.
He is omniscient and omnipotent. This, moreover, sounds like an old testament speech by one of the prophets of a vengeful God. Also, in my work on this play, I am looking for evidence on how the inspector manages to get the better of the Birlings.Firstly, the inspector catches them by surprise.
I don’t think it is a coincidence that the inspector calls during the conversation where Mr Birling is telling Gerald and Eric how every man should look after themselves. Also, he catches them at such a happy time, e. g. “incidentally, we’ve been modestly celebrating his engagement to my daughter, Shelia”. Because of this celebration, the Birlings have let their guard down and let the inspector infiltrate and probe them with question they might have been wary of if it had been another time.
Even the lighting directions in the script show this. At the start the lights are “pink and intimate” but when the inspector shows up they change to “brighter and harder”. Pink is light and cheery because it is a party attitude. They then turn to brighter because the atmosphere is much more intense and close up. This is because the inspector is sort of a spot-light, interrogating the Birlings. He also gives them a false sense of security at the start, by coming in and being polite, so the Birlings think that nothing is out of the ordinary.
For xample, “thank you, sir” and “yes sir. Only recently transferred”. This also makes them let their guard down, letting the inspector ask them question inconspicusly without alerting them to any kind of danger. Later on though, he becomes less polite and starts ordering them about and accusing them, which no ordinary police inspector would do.
After this, he uses another technique and divides them up and rules. For example, when he is first showing Mr. Birling the photograph of Eva Smith, he will not let Eric or Gerald see. He then explains “one line of enquiry at a time”.This helps because the group can’t gang up on the inspector, and they don’t know what to expect so they can’t get a fake story prepared or pretend not to know Eva Smith.
He also provokes the group and sets traps with words. For example, he is talking to Gerald about Shelia, “You think young women should be protected against unpleasant and disturbing things? ” Gerald replies “If possible, yes”, the inspector retorts “well we know one young women who wasn’t, don’t we? ” The inspector’s first question leads Gerald into giving the obvious answer, which was yes, so the inspector could bring the whole thing back to Eva Smith.He is also very persistent in his line of inquiry, because he already knows that the person has done it, he just wants them to admit what they have done, so if they argue with him, he knows they must be lying. For example, “you mean you don’t choose to, Mrs Birling” and “you’re not telling me the truth”. He can afford to do this because he knows he is right, and, he doesn’t risk his job, unlike other police inspectors, because he isn’t actually an inspector.
This also catches the Birlings by surprise because of his harsh tone and rough manner. He also challenges and attacks the Birlings, and I can prove this by using the quotes above.This is unusual for the Birlings as they are high up in society and used to getting their own way. I think they are quite taken aback by this and just want to get rid of the inspector, so get sloppy in their answers. He is also not intimidated by the Birlings high stature and links within the police force. For example, “how do you get on with our Chief Constable, Colonel Roberts? ”.
This is an example of Mr. Birling trying to intimidate the inspector, but he isn’t. He also is very unpredictable and throws his weight around, interrupting the Birlings whenever he can, for example “(cutting in, with authority) he must wait his turn”.This also un-nerved the Birlings and lead them into saying more than they may have if it had been an ordinary police inspector. In conclusion, I believe that the inspector is some sort of other worldly spirit, but that J. B Priestley didn’t want us to know precisely, just speculate and drawn conclusions.
Plus, the inspector gets the better of the Birlings by surprising them, giving them a false sense of security, dividing them and ruling, setting traps with words, being persistent, being rude and pushy, not being intimidated and being unpredictable. Rory Johnson 10D
