Edwardian family Essay

The furniture alone really shows the wealth and opulence of this upper class Edwardian family. The furniture and clothes also develops trust between the audience and characters as it gives off a cosy home feel.  It is obvious from when you first read act one that JB Priestley has made a deliberate effort to change the tone from how it was at the beginning (relaxed) to how it ended (tense). When we read the play for the first time, we get the impression that for people as superior as the Birlings to take any notice of somebody in a lower social class than them, somebody such as Eva Smith actually has to die. This shows huge injustice and makes us feel very sympathetic for Eva Smith. The main way he achieved this is by the use of the plot. This is because they are having a nice relaxed dinner party, and then an Inspector who they have never meet before knocks on their door, and begins to interrogate them about a suicide. This puzzles them as the police officer openly says that it was definitely a suicide, therefore what crime could they have committed.  Although this is the main reason for the drastic change in tone, Priestley does many other things to show this change. One aspect of his writing which does this is the way in which he wrote the inspectors lines. The inspector’s lines are all written so that it sounds extremely aggressive from the Birling’s point of view. One example of this, is when Shelia is being extremely honest, and is telling the Inspector how she got Eva Smith sacked. Shelia really shows how guilty she feels, how deeply sorry she is and how she would behave differently a second time. However the Inspector very bluntly says â€Å"Yes but you can’t. It’s too late. She’s dead. This is an extremely upfront and abrupt way of saying it. So he changes the mood from relaxed/happy to almost awkward and upsetting.  Due to this aggressiveness which the Inspector shows from the moment he walks in the door, Mr Birling almost tries to fight back which results in both of them almost competing in a childish game, where they keep trying to get one up on each other. E.g. (who’s the bigger man) This is shown by Mr Birling consistently mentioning that he has friends in high places. He does this in a very subtle and sly manor. At this point both of them know the involvement Mr Birling had with Eva Smith. Mr Birling remembered Eva Smith because he fired from his company her due to a campaign she led for higher pay. Therefore he last meet Eva Smith under unpleasant circumstances. This secret that both the inspector and Mr Birling had was probably what sparked off this aggressiveness. The first time we see this happening is when Mr Birling says â€Å"Perhaps I ought to warn you that he’s an old friend of mine, and that I see him fairly frequently. We play golf together at the West Bromley†. The â€Å"old friend† being the inspector’s chief constable. In a way Mr Birling is trying to tell the Inspector to tread carefully, by letting him know he has friends in high places.  This aggressiveness certainly demonstrates how Priestley changes the tone so drastically and so effectively. It also keeps the audience gripped making it very exciting.  All of the characters in this play have very strong personalities one way or another, and all of them represent some kind of portrayal above everybody else in the play. Shelia, for example, shows that she feels more remorse than anyone else by far and seems truly hurt and guilty by the whole thing. For example when the inspector asked Shelia â€Å"And was it the girls fault?†Ã‚  Shelia replies â€Å"No, not really. It was my own stupid fault†.  She has shown her honesty by owning up to it unlike her self obsessed father who would argue everything until he was proved completely wrong. She also displayed remorse by ridiculing herself, saying â€Å"It was my own stupid fault†.  Again she shows that she is sorry when she says â€Å"Oh-why had this to happen†. Rather than saying something like Mr Birling would say e.g.: â€Å"Well it was her own fault in the first place†. Shelia plays the kind understanding character to the play, who comes across as more innocent than anybody else. She brings reason to the equation and we probably feel the more sympathy for her than anyone else. This is because when she tells her story, Priestley writes it as if it was from the bottom of her heart/sincerely. Another reason we feel this sympathy for her is because we feel she has been conned out the most, when we find out that the inspector is a fake. This is because she seems to have poured her heart out more then everybody else and after she finds out that the inspector is a con she still defends the morals the Inspector was saying even though the entire Eva Smith scenario, was completely false based on the knowledge they had at the time. This happens in the 3rd act when Shelia says to Mr Birling â€Å"It doesn’t matter now of course, but was he really a police inspector?† Mr Birling then replies â€Å"Well if he wasn’t, it matters a devils lot. Makes all the difference.†Ã‚  Shelia then snappily responds â€Å"No it doesn’t†.  She says this meaning that just because the Inspector is gone nothing is changed because what he was saying was correct even if it was fictional. However Mr Birling cannot understand that the message has not changed, now they know the story was fiction and just says â€Å"Don’t be so childish, Shelia†.  This is another event in the play which supports Shelia’s kind, understanding and more mature than her father’s personality. She represents a possibility of social change and seems to have some basic morality.