The whole way through the play the Inspector keeps reminding the family that there isn’t one of them that will be getting away with anything as they are united in blame. The inspector is clearly a socialistic character in the play, Priestley uses him to introduce the theme of social responsibility. However, as well as this the younger generation are eventually used to show the idea of socialism. Eric and Shelia also begin to side with the Inspector and the way Priestley has managed to develop the theme of social responsibility is by making the younger generation change to take over roles of the Inspector and therefore agree with him. This also means that you can understand that Eric and Sheila can understand the concept that everyone is partially to blame for the death of the girl.
Oscar Wilde is credited for being a provocateur for change in nineteenth century England. Wilde provides his audience with the opportunity to witness the inner-workings of Victorian society and their rebellion against following the social norms. Oscar Wilde uses the fabricated identities of Jack and Algernon, the main characters of the play, to show the rebellious nature of the aristocracy. Wilde portrays the Victorian upper-class as rigid and the secret lives are necessary to provide the freedom to express who they really are. While the middle-class of England looks up to the upper-class Victorians with respect and envy, both Jack and Algernon dislike the propriety of it all.
Priestley presents ideas about responsibility in an 'An Inspector Calls' by portraying the inspector as a conscience ,using him to represent a good example of responsibility in society. He uses the sound of the doorbell to interrupt Birling's rant on his views on society. Priestley uses the shocking announcement of Eva Smith's death to highlight the consequences of a lack of responsibility. The clarity of Eric and Sheila's realisation of the consequences of their actions sends a strong message to the audience about responsibility. The character of the inspector is written by Priestley as a representation of morality in the play.
Not far in the text, during one of his speeches, he expresses his opinion on the theory that ‘every man for himself’ should find a way to survive. His capitalist opinion is later contrasted with the character of the Inspector, who comes in to reveal the mystery death of Eva Smith. Through his language and actions; giving a working class woman the respect of finding out the cause of her death rather than just leaving her to be buried without anyone being blamed and punished. He is showing the message in the play, by his positive
Inspector calls-Social responsibility In An Inspector Calls, the central theme is responsibility. Priestley is interested in our personal responsibility for our own actions and our collective responsibility to society. The play explores the effect of class, age and sex on people's attitudes to responsibility, and shows how prejudice can prevent people from acting responsibly. Priestley was a socialist and one of the big questions he is asking his audience is ‘How should society be organised?’ He is offering us a choice between socialism in which the rich are compelled to share their wealth or through capitalism where you are allowed to keep more of your money. Priestly puts across his social message by making the inspector to try get the others to accept that all people share a common humanity and so are all put of an independent community.
The Appearance and Approach of The Inspector Serves More Than One Purpose for J.B Priestly, discuss? „Proletarier aller Länder vereinigt Euch!” (Workers of the world, Unite!) - Karl Marx It can be assumed that Priestley’s overall motivation for writing ‘An Inspector Calls’ is to promote a socialist worldview. In the play, Priestley uses a lot of his political views in the Inspectors speeches by using him almost as a mouthpiece for his own socialism. But what else does the image of the Inspector as a character represent?
Evaluate the Marxist perspective of religion Marxists are a group of sociologists that believe “religion is the opium of the people”, therefore it acts as a drug to dull the pain of oppression for the working class and makes life seem more bearable. However, sociologists have long been divided on the function of religion, so Marxists can be criticised in a number of ways. Marxists argue that religion benefits the ruling class in a number of ways. Firstly, it promises life after death which makes our suffering in this life more acceptable. Secondly, it makes social inequality seem fair and just, justifying social hierarchy.
Hobbes idea that “people orbiting their ruler” leads me to the idea of socialism/communism (Sayre, 2012). His belief in the social contract theory led him to believe humans should be controlled by fear, and that they should willingly submit to governance. His thoughts on how people giving up their freedom, and submitting to their ruler seems a lot like slavery. He believed humans were servants to their ruler, and if they followed and obeyed the ruler they would have peace. John Locke would respond to Hobbes ideas on government by stating that humans were capable of governing themselves (Sayre, 2012).
For example the nature vs nurture debate. Talcott parsons (1902-79) were a key functionalist thinker. He saw society as a system made up of interrelated institutions (like the human body) He thought the main role of an institution was to socialise individuals so they behaved in acceptable ways. He argued that socialisation is the key to understanding patterns of human behaviour. Our behaviour is controlled by the rules of society into which we are born; the result is we don’t have to be told that what we are doing is socially unacceptable- we already know and feel uncomfortable if we don’t conform to social norms.
Willy Russell is one of the most important working-class playwrights of our time and his politics and social attitudes are expressed through comedic value. It is in this way the paradoxical status quo of Frank and Rita is expressed through comedy in his play ‘Educating Rita,’ 1983 and it is this paradox that will form much of this discussion in looking at how the role of comedy highlights social differences and how these social differences could be viewed with hilarity rather than seriousness; in other words Russell wants us to laugh at social class because it is so ridiculous and that people should be judged on merit and not where they come from. Much of the comedy in the play stems from Rita and Frank’s conversations. Their cultural differences are a noticeable source of comedy in the play; where Rita speaks colloquially and has a working class accent, Frank speaks in Standard English without any accent. This is significant because Rita’s lively and irreverent speech is a source of humour in the play.