Edwardian family Essay

The furniture al star re altogethery deputes the wealth and opulence of this upper relegate Edwardian family. The furniture and clothes also develops trust between the auditory modality and characters as it gives off a cosy home feel.It is obvious from when you counterbalance read act one that JB Priestley has made a deliberate bowel movement to change the tonicity from how it was at the beginning (relaxed) to how it ended (tense). When we read the playfulness for the premiere time, we get the impression that for people as superior as the birles to take any notice of well-nighbody in a disap post social class than them, somebody such as Eva Smith in truth has to die. This shows huge injustice and makes us feel rattling sympathetic for Eva Smith.The main counsel he achieved this is by the use of the plot. This is because they are having a victorian relaxed dinner party, and then an Inspector who they afford never meet in the first-year place knocks on their door, an d begins to interrogate them about a suicide. This puzzles them as the law of nature officeholder 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 testers lines. The testers lines are all written so that it sounds exceedingly in-your-face from the Birlings point of view. One example of this, is when Shelia is being passing honest, and is telling the Inspector how she got Eva Smith sacked. Shelia really shows how guilty she feels, how deeply dirty she is and how she would behave differently a second time. However the Inspector precise bluntly says Yes but you cant. Its too late. Shes dead.This is an extremely upfront and abrupt way of saying it. So he changes the peevishness from relaxed/happy to almost awkward and upsetting.Due to this aggr essiveness which the Inspector shows from the significance 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 act to get one up on each other. E.g. (whos the large man)This is shown by Mr Birling consistently mentioning that he has admirers 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(prenominal) pay. Therefore he last meet Eva Smith under sulfurous 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 Perhaps I ought to expostulate with you that hes an old friend of mine, and that I see him somewhat frequently. We play golf together at the West Bromley. The old friend being the inspectors chief constable. In a way Mr Birling is trying to tell the Inspector to tread carefully, by permit 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 enactment above everybody else in the play.Shelia, for example, shows that she feels more than remorse than anyone else by far and seems rattling hurt and guilty by the whole thing. For example when the inspector asked Shelia And was it the girls switching?Shelia replies No, not really. It was my own yokel- wish well fault.She has shown her honesty by owning up to it unlike her self obsessed come who would argue everything until he was be completely wrong. She also displayed remorse by ridiculing herself, saying It was my ow n stupid fault.Again she shows that she is sorry when she says Oh-why had this to happen. Rather than saying something like Mr Birling would say e.g. 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 benignity 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 bounty 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 compensate though the entire Eva Smith scenario, was completely false based on the knowledge they had at the time. This happens in the 3rd act w hen Shelia says to Mr Birling It doesnt matter now of course, but was he really a police inspector?Mr Birling then replies Well if he wasnt, it matters a devils lot. Makes all the difference.Shelia then snappily responds No it doesnt.She says this meaning that just because the Inspector is kaput(p) nothing is changed because what he was saying was correct even if it was illustrational. However Mr Birling cannot understand that the message has not changed, now they know the story was fiction and just says Dont be so childish, Shelia.This is another topic in the play which supports Shelias kind, understanding and more mature than her fathers personality. She represents a possibility of social change and seems to have some basic morality.