User:15uppald/sandbox

Mr Birling
Mr Birling is the father, and leader of the contemptuous Birling family. He is described by Priestly as a Portentous man. Throughout the play, we see Arthur Birling being conveyed by the play write as a rather pompous and injudicious character. He shows no remorse or concern for his wrongful actions, unless they affect his social status. Birling is also portrayed as a defiant capitalist and extremely narrow minded. Priestly presents Mr Arthur Birling and a ignorant and foolish character with us use of Dramatic Irony. As Mr Birling was delivering his speech at his daughter, Sheila's engagement, he mentioned that the titanic, was unsinkable, absoluteness unsinkable. As the play was written in 1945, we know that this bold statement is far from correct. Instantly, Priestlys use of dramatic irony not only proves that it is a mistaken view, but it allows the audience to understand that Arthur Birling is not wise, but infact a rather stupid and injudicious character. Priestly is also conveying that Arthur is very narrow minded. He is only interested in the present, and does not look to the future, Mr Birling does not have a open mind. Like most men at that time, they believed that nothing could change. They believed that the rich would always rule over the poor, that the labour cranks could never be a ruling government, and Arthur Birling represents these views. Moreover, Priestlys use of repetition on the word unsinkable suggests that Mr Birling in certain that he is correct, when infarct he is far from it, making him appear to be foolish. On the other hand, not only does Priestlys use of the infamous titanic make Arthur look stupid, but it is also a symbol of arrogance. The titanic was a ship for the rich aristocrats of 1912, those who thought they were the hierarchy of society, much like what Mr Birling would like to see himself as. So for priestly to use the titanic as a example suggests that Birling is also a arrogant and pompous character. Alternatively,the dramatic quote unsinkable, absoluteness unsinkable is Priestly foreshadowing the Birlings sinking fate. Mr Birling is so certain that he knows about everything, yet he is not aware that soon he will have a mysterious visitor at the door.

J.B Priestly uses Mr Birlings talk of war to convey his socialists views to the audience, and oppress Arthur's capitalist views. Mr Birling portrays his narrow minded views on war when he says youll hear some people say that wars inevitable, and to that, i say- fiddlesticks!". The play was written around the time when the second world war was coming to a end, so the audience are aware that Mr Birlings optimistic views are again, incorrect. Also, the play was set in 1912, 2 years before the first world war, Priestly uses this small time frame to display Arthur as a injudicious character. Priestly was aiming to use the post word war vulnerability of the audience to oppress capitalist views and project his socialist views. In 1912, the rigid class and gender boundaries ensured that nothing would change, however by 1945, these divisions had been breached. The writer is aware that audience to not want another war, and from watching this play, do not want times to be like 1912, so he used Mr birling as a catalyst to project these negative views. Priestly id also saying that capitalists are also like Mr Birling, they all think they are correct, when infact they are far from it. Moreover, the writer uses the dramatic quote about war to remind the audience of what happens when certain individuals seek power for themselves rather than caring for others. His message is to encourage the people of 1945 to seize the opportunity the war had given them to build a better, more caring society. As Inspector Goole says, we are all members of one body, dont you agree? Priestly also conveys Mr Birling as a imprudent character who only cares about his social status. His behaviours remains like this throughout the play. When the inspector arrived, Arthur had to make in known that his soon to be son in law was aristocrat, the son of Sir George Croft. Birling did not even introduce his own son, but rather dismissed him whenever he spoke. This suggests that because of social status, Mr Birling treats Gerald more like a son to gain some sort of social respect. Secondly, in 1912 it was uncommon to marry somebody out of your social class, Birling was aware that his family were slightly lower on the social scale than Crofts Limited. However, he made sure that Gerald Croft was aware that he was soon to be added onto the honours list, so that the Crofts would not dismiss him. Even when the inspector left, Arthur did not show any sign or sorrow for Eva Smith, but he was rather more worried about it ruining his reputation. He did not want it to become a public scandal. Despite the fact that Gerald Croft commited a sinful act against Mr Birlings daughter, Arthur still toasted with Gerald when he discovered Inspector Goole was a fraud. Arthur was so happy and relieved that it would not become a public scandal that he would even drink with someone who caused his daughter pain and distress. Alternitavley, the fact that he toasted with Gerald suggests that he still wants to hold a relationship with him because of his social status. Arthur would use any excuse not to loose a bond with the son of Sir George Croft, and not to loose the potential chance of going in business with the successful Crofts Limited. In 1912, withholding a relationship with a aristocrat meant that you could climb up the social ladder, there would be no risk of going on the streets, Eva Smith's summer affair with Gerald Croft is a clear example of this. Mr Birling did not learn the morals that Priestly presented through the play ''An Inspector Calls'. He did not understand the fact that sacking Eva Smith from his workplace for his own financial benefit was wrong. Unlike his two children, Eric and Sheila, who actually acknowledge their wrongdoing and showed remorse. Infact, young Eric who was often dismissed by his portentous father told him he was ashamed of him for what he did. Priestlys purpose was to again, opress capitalists, and he used Mr Arthur Birling as a catalyst. Arthur was not willing to take responsibility for his actions, but he infact only cared about how he would look to society. He does not care for people, or in this case, his employees. Priestly used Mr Birling to represent capitalists. He is presenting the message that like Mr Birling, they are not willing to change, and only care for themselves, not their supporters. As Mr Birling says  a man has to look after himself. As a reader, i do not empathise with Arthur Birling as he seems to fail to connect with the writers message of fairness and humbleness. The author portrays him as a foolish character and also uses dramatic irony that capitalists are the cause of disaster such as war. Birling showed no remorse for a dead girl and even toasted with a adulterer. However, Priestlys use of conveying Arthur as a pompous, imprudent and imperious character allowed me to understand socialist views, and to believe that we aare all responsible for each other, and that we are all members of one body.