How are women presented in ‘An Inspector Calls’?
5+
In ‘An Inspector Calls’, Priestley presents ideas about women through Sheila and Gerald’s relationship. When Gerald is questioned by the inspector, Priestley has Gerald admit that he had an affair with Eva Smith. The fact that Gerald had this affair shows a lack of respect for both Sheila and Eva Smith, who he had no intention of continuing a relationship with due to their class differences. After the inspector leaves, Priestley has Gerald say to Sheila ‘how about this ring?’. This demonstrates that Gerald is happy to forget everything that happened after he learns that the Inspector wasn’t real and expects Sheila to forget all about the affair. Priestley presents him as irresponsible and as somebody who had not learned from their careless treatment of both Eva and Sheila. Priestley uses Gerald to suggest that wealthy men often had affairs and took advantage of women with no damage to their own lives.
Priestley also explores ideas about women through Eva Smith’s treatment by Arthur Birling. When the Inspector questions Arthur Birling about Eva Smith’s request for a payrise, Priestley has Birling state ‘I refused, of course’. The words ‘of course’ suggests that Arthur was not even considering paying Eva fairly for her hard word at his factory. The word ‘refused’ also suggests that Arthur unkindly turned her away when Eva wanted equality. This is surprising given that, later in the play, Birling offers ‘thousands’ to the inspector in order to bribe him to remain quiet about the scandal. It is clear that Birling could have afforded to give Eva Smith more money but chooses not to due to his selfish attitudes. Priestley’s 1945 audience, who had socialist values, would have criticised Arthur for treating a vulnerable member of society in this way. Priestley does this to criticise those in power and highlight the need for equality and change.
Finally, Priestley presents ideas about women through Sybil Birling’s treatment of Eva Smith. During the inspector’s questioning, Priestley has Sybil admit she was prejudiced against ‘girls of that class’. The words ‘that class’ suggest that Sybil views all working class girls as beneath her. The audience may have found this attitude surprising from a charity worker, who should be trusted to look after the people who come to them for help. Priestley demonstrates that women like Eva Smith were treated the worst of all. Not only is Eva Smith a woman, which means she is treated poorly by men, but also she is working class, which means that she is also treated poorly by rich women. Priestley reveals that working class women had the most hardship because they were treated poorly for both their gender and their class. Priestley hoped that his 1945 audience would realise that there needed to be fairer treatment for all women.
7+
In ‘An Inspector Calls’ Priestley uses the systematic and clockwork abuse of the Birling family and Gerald Croft in order to criticise the upper class and their treatment of working class women in 1912. Although the play revolves around Eva Smith’s death, the negation of her appearance and the presence of the selfish Birlings, are used to criticise poor women and demonstrate their absence of power.
In ‘An Inspector Calls’, Priestley wanted to show that society was very unequal and that working-class women were abused by society. Priestley has each member of the Birling family, and Gerold Croft, play a huge role in Eva Smith’s suicide. As a working-class woman with very little money or rights, she relied on help from those who had better opportunities than her. When the Inspector questions Arthur Birling about Eva, he states ‘I refused, of course’ when he tells the Inspector that Eva asked for a pay rise. The words ‘of course’ suggests that Arthur was not even considering paying Eva fairly for her hard word at his factory. The word ‘refused’ also suggests that Arthur unkindly turned her away when Eva wanted equality. Priestley’s 1945 audience, who had socialist values, would have criticised Arthur for treating a vulnerable member of society in this way. Priestley does this to criticise those in power and highlight the need for equality and change.
Priestley uses the selfish, careless behaviour of male characters to highlight how women were considered unimportant. Both Gerald and Eric use Eva Smith or Daisy Renton, and Sheila is cheated on by Gerald. Eric takes advantage of Eva when he is drunk and Gerald has an affair with Eva knowing that he cannot offer her a long-lasting relationship due to their class differences. Although this becomes clear through the Inspector’s questioning, Gerald attempts to return to the engagement with Sheila when Priestley has him say ‘how about this ring?’ This shows that Gerald is happy to forget everything that happened after he learns that the Inspector wasn’t real. Priestley presents him as irresponsible and as somebody who had not learned from their careless treatment of both Eva and Sheila. Priestley uses Gerald to suggest that wealthy men often had affairs and took advantage of women with no damage to their own lives.
Priestley makes the victim of his play, Eva Smith, a woman in order to show how unfair society was in 1912. Eva Smith never once appears in person in the play: she is voiceless and powerless. She is also dead before the play begins due to the selfish and careless actions of the Birlings and members of the upper class. Priestley deliberately makes Eva Smith voiceless to represent how little power working class people had. The name ‘Smith’ is very common. Priestley chose a common name to suggest that there are many people like Eva Smith in society and that society needs to change. When Priestley wrote his play, the Labour party had just been voted in and society was very interested in equality. Priestley deliberately sets the play in 1912 so that his audience can reflect on the inequality of life in 1912: a time when women did not even have the right to vote. Priestley wanted his audience to realise how much had changed but also how much work still needed to be done.
In conclusion, Priestley uses the vulnerable and unseen character of Eva Smith, in addition to the cruelty exhibited by the Birlings, in order to criticise capitalist societies and their treatment of the poor. Priestley suggests that cruel treatment at the hands of the wealthy to end: a message that would have been warmly received by his post-war audience who were keen to end class division.