Any Questions?

Right everyone,

That's pretty much the whole pack uploaded in sections now. Please continue to spread the word that it is now all up online. I don't want anyone missing out if we can help it.

If there are any more question, post them on her and I will check back tomorrow. However, you really should have enough to write a 1000 word essay on this now.

Good luck,

NW

Ok - So here's the ideas for the main body of the essay.

Firstly, make sure you comment on a range of devices throughout your essay. That way you are showing a thorough understanding of the author's purposes.

For example, the way the stage is set up speaks quite highly concerning the subject of RESPONSIBILITY. Look at the opening stage directions where it describes how 'heavily comfortable' the house is (implying that no care has been given to the amount spent etc). Look at the descriptions of port/cigars/champagne. Remember that the original audience for this play was currently in a war situation and on ration for even the most basic of amenities. The playwright here is hinting at the lack of responsibility shown by the upper classes in their spending and hoarding of wealth, especially as we go on to find out that a poor girl has committed suicide due to being left with no other choice.

The stage directions are heavily important throughout the play. Look at how the lighting changes in the opening directions, for example. The lights change from a comfortable 'pink' before the inspector arrives, to ' hard and bright' after he arrives. The playwright has used the opening directions to hint at the responsibility of this family for the death of Eva Smith. He does this by making the scene look like an interrogation through his use of bright lighting - subconsciously hinting to the audience that this 'everyday' family are responsible for things that they have not even considered.

The Inspector, as well as being a main character, is a fantastic DRAMATIC DEVICE and you should refer to him throughout your essay in the same way that his influence runs throughout the play. He has been mad into a deliberately vague character. His name 'Goole' (Ghoul) hints that there may be something supernatural about him, implying that the things you are RESPONSIBLE FOR will catch up with you eventually. There is no escape from the consequences of your actions. In a way, Goole is a little bit like the ghosts from Dickens' 'A Christmas Carol'. It seems that he is coming to give the Birling family a chance to REPENT for what they have done. Perhaps, if they take this opportunity to REALISE what they have done, then fate will look sparingly on them in future. Look at how he enters the play to back this up. The fact that no one know where he has come from etc. The mystery surrounding him. You will find many quotes to support this. Pages 169-171.

The Inspector acts as a sort of moral compass. He is not just the voice of the playwright, but also the voice of the common people and the voice of socialism. His views are not particularly radical. Look at how he talks to people. FIND SOME QUOTES. He is not particularly rude to people but he is stubborn and outspoken. A lot of the things he says are simply concerned with bringing attention to how each individual characters is RESPONSIBLE for their actions. His words permeate throughout the play. The watching audience would see the Inspector as a force to be reckoned with; somebody who has come to put the Birlings in their place (however, remember that the Birlings could represent any well-to-do family of the time, and at this time, it would have been more wealthy people who would have been sitting in the theatre stalls!). The fact that the Inspector is an authority figure is important too. THis means that people are more likely to take notice of what he says. Those that don't (Mrs Birling for example) appear hugely arrogant and bigoted. They won't even take notice of what an authoritative figure has to say on the matter!

JUST SO YOU KNOW, THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN 600 WORDS! WE HAVEN'T EVEN STARTED LOOKING AT INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERS YET!

So, anyway, you can then begin to look at and analyse the responsibility of each character in the play. The dramatic STRUCTURE of the play assists this greatly. The entire play is set in one room, and the setting does not change at all throughout the play (LOOK AT THE STAGE DIRECTIONS AT THE START OF EACH ACT FOR EVIDENCE). This means that the room takes on the appearance of an interrogation room; emphasising the responsibility of each character for the death of Eva Smith. This is further exacerbated by the fact that the characters 'take it in turns' to come into the room to be interrogated by the inspector, almost as if we are watching some sort of court case. You will find many quotations to back this up if you have a flick through the play.

Then, the Inspector starts to make his way through the characters one-by-one. The first character is Birling. With this episode, the playwright is able to bring out his views on 'The Welfare State'. Birling's role in Eva's death is that he sacked her for asking for fairer pay conditions. Look at pages 170-176 to find your quotes. The reason responsibility is important here is two-fold. Firstly, Birling seems shocked and incredulous that he could possibly have had anything to do with her death, as he had not seen her for two years. Here, the audience is being reminded that anybody that we have anything to do with is partly our responsibility as we never know what sort of effect we might have on a person. Birling's quote 'If we were responsible for everybody we'd ever had anything to do with, it would be very awkward....' is massively important. In the eyes of the Inspector, that is exactly how things are. We ARE RESPONSIBLE for others; it doesn;t matter how AWKWARD that is. It is just a fact of life. The quote shows Birling's attitude towards responsibility. ie, he does not feel responsible AT ALL, especially when dealing with somebody outside of his social class. The  second reason why his is important is that it shows how IRRESPONSIBLE the upper classes were in terms of the way they treated workers. In 1912, workers had NO RIGHT (No minimum wage, no unions, no employment law). This was an exploitative and unfair system designed to benefit the minority and opress the majority. Birling's lack of responsible behaviour is further demonstrated by the fact that he sacked Eva Smith from employment, even thought the foreman of the factory had recently recommended her for a promotion. He was planning to PROMOTE her, but instead SACKED HER simply because she had the audacity to ask for better working conditions. This is a stark message from the playwright concerning how we should treat people of lower classes. Birling's refusal to take responsibility for his actions (FIND A QUOTE) is an attack on the older mmbers of the upper class - stuck in their ways and soon to be made sorry for their actions.

The next character to be questioned by the Inspector is Sheila. She is a member of the younger generation and shows signs of wanting to take responsibility for her actions, but not before she has shown a more sinister side to her character. Priestley uses this scene to attack the superficial characteristics of the upper class. Sheila goes out of her way to request that Eva Smith is sacked from her job at MILWARDS because she believes that Eva laughed/smiled behind her back when she tried on a dress in the shop. This should hopefully serve as a huge lesson to the watching audience (ie, look at the effect that your selfishness and superficiality can have on a person). This is proven even further when Sheila asks if the girl who has killed herself was 'Pretty?'. This emphasises the idea that the upper classes are only concerned with outward appearance (think about Birling's impending Knighthood for example), rather than personal wellbeing. (PAGES 177-180 WILL BE BEST FOR FINDING QUOTES HERE). However, once Sheila realises what she has done, she appears to repent deeply - not just here but also later on in the play. She things such as that she would do anything to be able to go back and change things etc. The audience will probably relate to her and sympathise with her. Many of the audience members may have found themselves in similar positions to th Birlings before, and so this is a lesson to them in terms of how they should act.

Next up is Gerald who is guilty of having n affair with Eva Smith/Daisy Renton. On page 182, Gerald is so concerned with outward appearance, and so lacking in willingness to take RESPONSIBILITY for his actions that he even asks his fiance to help him to keep the details of the affair from the Inspector. This shows he is far more concerned with what society thinks that the people he is supposed to care most deeply about. Between pages 189-193 (FIND QUOTES) we learn of Gerald's affair with Daisy Renton when he was supposed to be in a relationship with Sheila Birling. Note how none of the Birling's ever seem particularly angry with Gerald over this. It is almost as though they do not have to face the RESPONSIBILITY of what he has done, provided the details never find their way out into the public domain. Gerald is certainly not all bad. At first, if we forget the fact that he is being unfaithful, he certainly seems to treat Daisy Renton with a great deal of respect. It almost seems like he feels genuine guilt for the fact that she is at such a low social status whilst he is in a particularly comfortable position. (FOND QUOTES). To a point, one could argue that he very definitely takes RESPONSIBILITY for her. He doesn't just use her for sex (although he doesn't exactly turn it down either!) and he seems, genuinely, to want to make a difference to her life. However, his responsibility to her fails when he is effectively forced to choose between keeping her a secret or admitting to the relationship in a legitimate fashion (something which he is simply not prepared to do). In some ways, Gerald is worse than the rest of them, for two reasons. Firstly, he is the only one who seems to genuinely have FEELINGS for Daisy Renton/Eva Smith, yet he is not prepared to take RESPONSIBILITY for his feelings to the extent that he will fully let her into his life. Secondly, he provides Eva Smith/Daisy Renton with a fantastic lifestyle, only to cruelly take it away from her. It may have been better if she had never known the difference. That way, she could have avoided huge disappointment. Look at how Gerald takes responsibility for what he has done. Do you think he does/doesn't? What makes you think that?

The next characters interrogated by the Inspector is certainly the cruelest - Mrs Birling. It is massively important to point out that Mrs Birling (as it says at the start of the play) is Mr Birling's social superior. So, there certainly seems to be a correlation between social status and a lack of responsibility taken for actions. This is a huge message to the audience. Mrs Birling is almost protrayed as a 'pantomime villain' - a rich a heartless character that the audience can really hate. The fact that Mrs Birling is the head of a charity is vitally important. Evidently, charities were the only organisation there to HELP the poor at this time. The idea that someone in charge could act like this shows that they are not RESPONSIBLE in the slightest. Her job as head/patron of the charity is simply to extend her social standing, not because she cares about people. This is shown in stark detail when on page 197 she states that she actively used her influence to ensure that Eva Smith/Daisy Renton did not receive help. Not only is this a failure to take responsibility, it is downright vindictive cruelty. In the following pages (198-200), Mrs Birling then goes on to state that she has done nothing wrong, and that the true responsibility lies with the girl herself and the father of the child (an opinion which soon disappears when she realises that the father was her own son!). Investigate the parts of the text where Mrs Birling talks about responsibility, and PEE it to death! It is HUGELY important.

Lastly, we can plainly see where Eric's responsibility lies. He is/was the father of Eva/Daisy's unborn child. He has been totally irresponsible. Not only is he an alcoholic, but he also actively went out to find sex on the night that he first met Eva. We are told that he forced his way into her appartment, and can only assume that she had sex somewhat against her will. Obviously this would not have been reported as 'rape' at the time. Who would have believed a poor, working class girl over a upper/middle class businessman? In his favour, Eric tries to take responsibility for the situation by providing money to Eva once he realises that she is pregnant, but he does this in the most IRRESPONSIBLE way, by stealing money. Arguably, she acts infinitely more responsible than him by refusing to accept stolen money. Really, the responsible thing to do would have been for him to publicly admit what he had done and marry Eva Smith, but Eric proves himself to be just as spineless as his parents in terms of this. However, he certainly seems remorseful and repentant when he realises the consequences of what he has done. FIND QUOTES AND PEE regrading how he takes responsibility for his actions.

It is worth mentioning here that Eric is an alcoholic, (comment on the stage directions on page 203) AND YET HIS OWN FAMILY HAVE NOT NOTICED. They do not even take full responsibility for their own children, let alone anybody else.

The ending of the play is confusing and hugely important. Before the Inspector leaves, he delivers a few lengthy speeches regarding the family's responsibility and the state of the world. He is talking to the AUDIENCE here, as well as the Birlings. He states that there are many more like Eva SMith who still need to be helped. This is a MISSION STATEMENT. Audience members are supposed to hear this and CHANGE THEIR WAYS. We then watch the end of the play to see whether or not the Birlings take the same warning.

We could assume, for example, that if the Birlings had all said (We feel terrible. We can't believe wat we've done. We are going to live the rest of our lives making sure that the poor are treated fairly, and that we act responsibly) then the horrible ending to the play would not have happened. In literary terms, this is where the Birlings should have 'Learned their lesson', in the same way that Scrooge does in 'A Christmas Carol'. However, in this play, the family do not learn their lesson and they are effectively PUNISHED for it. Once the family figure out that Goole is not a real inspector, and that there is not really a suicide victim lying dead in the local hospital, they suddenly forget about all of the horrible, cruel things they have done, and begin to celebrate again. Provided they can 'cover up' what they have done, they will be happy. Once they have made this decision not to heed the warning of the inspector, the phone call comes through to inform them that they will now have to face the 'real life' trial concerning a 'real life' suicide (at least that is how I always read it anyway). They are given one last chance to take responsibility and repent - but they don't. Well, some of them don't anyway. The younger generation sort of do. You will need to put this isnto your own words, and use LOTS OF QUOTES from the text to back it up using PEE.

So, there you go! I've provided you with 2500 words of ideas, and you only have to write around 1000. Obviously I have not provided you with all the evidence that you need, but I have pointed you towards the right pages in most instances. Devote a couple of hours to this making notes, and you should be fine.

Essay plan is up to you. It should roughly follow this pattern,

Intro - Outlining themes and background

Around 8 - 10 paragraphs where you talk about any of the issues outlined above. How is RESPONSIBILITY important in relation to characters/text/structure/stage directions/messages to the audience.

Conclusion - summing up why responsibility was such an important issue in this play in relation to what was going on in the world at the time.

Good luck!

NW

Spread the word!

Google docs is really not being kind to me at all! I will have to just post things on here, and keep trying. If I don;t manage to get everything on tonight, it will be on in the morning. You'll still have plenty of time to prepare. Please spread the word to everyone in the class that this stuff is going online.

Cheers to everyone who has bobbed up so far.

NW

So, how to plan?

You are instructed to write about 1000 words, and you have 2 hours left to do it.

You should make around 1-2 sides of notes on A4 paper to take into the assessment with you. These should not contain CONTINUOUS PROSE.

As for what goes into the assessment, obviously that has to be up to you, and you should dedicate time preparing what you are going to write so that you are ready to begin the assessment when we get back next week.

There are many ways you could plan this.

To begin with, you really must write an introduction which explores the background to the play, talking about why the theme of responsibility is so important, why the years of writing/setting are so important etc.

Once you have done this, you need to work your way through important parts of the play, focusing closely on the text.

In note form, I am going to provide you with some ideas. It is up to you to read what I have put and decide which things you will focus on in your assessment, adding and expanding your own ideas along the way.

Ideas in next post!

A general overview - in case you need a bit of a 'way in'

Ok,

So you've all read the play, but some of you may need a bit of a 'way in' in order to help you understand exactly what this question is asking you:

Explore the ways in which the theme of RESPONSIBILITY is presented to the audience in the play.

We are basically saying, how is Responsibility important in the play.

The main reason is quite simple really. When the play was written, the Second World War was just coming to an end. Priestley, like many other people, had heeded the warnings which the world had been given by TWO WORLD WARS. Like many, he had seen the devastation and destruction that wars could cause. He was a staunch SOCIALIST, which meant that he believed everyone should be treated equally, regardless of their class or social standing. Because of this, Priestley was a massive supporter of the introduction of THE WELFARE STATE at the end of WWII (Meaning that benefits, NHS etc were introduced to support the working class and 'reward' them for their role in fighting for their country).

At this point, Priestley probably saw our country as being at a very important CROSSROADS. The wars (particularly WWII) had forced the classes to pull together to fight a common enemy. The scale of the war had taken its toll on the country and its economy. Everyone was subject to rationing. In many ways, the CLASS SYSTEM was far less important or prominent than it had been for a long time in this country.

Many people of the time saw that 'Britain had a choice': Return to the way things used to be, or move forward, treating everybody more fairly.

At the end of the day, we are all just people: whether we are royalty or binmen. Socialists REALISE THIS and believe that the way the world works should reflect this. Nobody in this country should die of starvation (for example) when there are people just a few miles away living in stately homes.

So, to illustrate his point, Priestley decided to set the play 33 years earlier, before either of the world wars had taken place. By doing this, he could show the watching audience HOW THINGS USED TO BE and to use it as a warning of how things could turn out if they didn't show more COMPASSION for each other, or TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS.

The play is set in 1912 - the year the Titanic sank, and 3 years before WWI. By setting the play in this year, Priestley was able to present a stuck up, arrogant family to the audience who seemed completely confident in their own social standing and their sure-to-be prosperous future. We in the audience, on the other hand, know that their future holds nothing but destruction and disaster simply because the attitudes of a relatively few people in the upper classes allowed Europe to go to war when it was not necessary.

To show this in even greater detail, Priestley creates a MICROCOSM. The BIRLINGS represent the ROCHER CLASSES and their actions, whereas EVA SMITH/DAISY RENTON represents the POORER/WORKING CLASSES. By seeing how the richer characters treat poor Eva Smith, it illustrates to the audience how the actions of some can have a total and disastrous effect on others.

Quite simply, some of the characters TAKE RESPONSIBILITY for their actions, and other don't. In your essay, you need to explore:

Who does

Who doesn't

How this is shown

and

What Priestley i trying to get us to think!

The Mark Scheme - MUST READ!

As you can see, the mark scheme requires you to provide "a convincing response, supported by perceptive textual reference" if you want to achieve a band 5. This means you must ALWAYS support what you have put with evidence from the text. As we have discussed before, you will show yourself to be PERCEPTIVE by:

*Making points that the majority of people won't see.
*Backing up your points with MULTIPLE pieces of evidence, or by FORMING AN ARGUMENT showing how a character, theme etc has changed over time.
*Making assumptions and hypothesising over what the purpose to of the playwright is/was when the play was written - ie, WHAT IS HE TRYING TO GET THE AUDIENCE TO THINK?

You must also show PERCEPTIVE UNDERSTANDING OF THE THEME/IDEAS.

So, you must show that you totally understand the following things:

*How is the theme of responsibility SHOWN
*Why is it presented as being such a big deal in the play?
*What was going on in the world at the time that made this such a big, important deal??

Make sure you keep this in mind as you are working folks!

NW

Preparation for the task! (Taken from BBC Website)

(Having a bit of trouble figuring out how to upload as a google doc - so I will put a bit of prep on there for you to be getting on with)

TASK - Explore the ways in which the theme of RESPONSIBILITY is presented to the audience in the play.

To begin with, it is absolutely essential that you understand the background to this play. The best way for you to get your heads around this will be for me to take some snippets from BBC’s Bitesize site, which sums up the issues surrounding this play nicely.

It is essential that your introduction outlines these issues:

*What was the world like when the play was written?

*What was it like when the play was set?

*What are the playwright’s main messages and lessons to the watching audience?

Etc.

John Boynton Priestley was born in Yorkshire in 1894. He knew early on that he wanted to become a writer, but decided against going to university as he thought he would get a better feel for the world around him away from academia. Instead, he became a junior clerk with a local wool firm at the age of 16.

When the First World War broke out, Priestley joined the infantry and only just escaped death on a number of occasions. After the war, he gained a degree from Cambridge University, then moved to London to work as a freelance writer. He wrote successful articles and essays, then published the first of many novels, The Good Companions, in 1929. He wrote his first play in 1932 and went on to write 50 more. Much of his writing was ground-breaking and controversial. He included new ideas about possible parallel universes and strong political messages.

During the Second World War he broadcast a massively popular weekly radio programme which was attacked by the Conservatives as being too left-wing. The programme was eventually cancelled by the BBC for being too critical of the Government.

He continued to write into the 1970s, and died in 1984.

During the 1930's Priestley became very concerned about the consequences of social inequality in Britain, and in 1942 Priestley and others set up a new political party, the Common Wealth Party, which argued for public ownership of land, greater democracy, and a new 'morality' in politics. The party merged with the Labour Party in 1945, but Priestley was influential in developing the idea of the Welfare State which began to be put into place at the end of the war.

He believed that further world wars could only be avoided through cooperation and mutual respect between countries, and so became active in the early movement for a United Nations. And as the nuclear arms race between West and East began in the 1950s, he helped to found CND, hoping that Britain would set an example to the world by a moral act of nuclear disarmament.

This was the period of the Russian Revolution, two appalling world wars, the Holocaust and the Atom Bomb.

This table describes what society was like in 1912 and in 1945

An Inspector Callsis set in 1912	An Inspector Calls was written in 1945.	Images
The First World War would start in two years. Birling's optimistic view that there would not be a war is completely wrong.	The Second World War ended in Europe on 8 May 1945. People were recovering from nearly six years of warfare, danger and uncertainty.
There were strong distinctions between the upper and lower classes.	Class distinctions had been greatly reduced as a result of two world wars.
Women were subservient to men. All a well off women could do was get married; a poor woman was seen as cheap labour.	As a result of the wars, women had earned a more valued place in society.
The ruling classes saw no need to change the status quo.	There was a great desire for social change. Immediately after The Second World War, Clement Attlee's Labour Party won a landslide victory over Winston Churchill and the Conservatives.

Priestley deliberately set his play in 1912 because the date represented an era when all was very different from the time he was writing. In 1912, rigid class and gender boundaries seemed to ensure that nothing would change. Yet by 1945, most of those class and gender divisions had been breached. Priestley wanted to make the most of these changes. Through this play, he encourages people to seize the opportunity the end of the war had given them to build a better, more caring society.

Bitesize also offers some points/notes about responsibility which will be worth reading to help with your planning etc:

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.

So, how does Priestley weave the themes through the play?

Responsibility

Enlarge image

The words responsible and responsibilityare used by most characters in the play at some point.

Each member of the family has a different attitude to responsibility. Make sure that you know how each of them felt about their responsibility in the case of Eva Smith.

The Inspector wanted each member of the family to share the responsibility of Eva's death: he tells them, "each of you helped to kill her." However, his final speech is aimed not only at the characters on stage, but at the audience too:

One Eva Smith has gone - but there are millions and millions and millions of Eva Smiths and John Smiths still left with us, with their lives, their hopes and fears, their suffering and chance of happiness, all intertwined with our lives, and what we think and say and do.

The Inspector is talking about a collective responsibility, everyone is society is linked, in the same way that the characters are linked to Eva Smith. Everyone is a part of "one body", the Inspector sees society as more important than individual interests. The views he is propounding are like those of Priestley who was a socialist.

He adds a clear warning about what could happen if, like some members of the family, we ignore our responsibility:

And I tell you that the time will soon come when, if men will not learn that lesson, when they will be taught it in fire and blood and anguish.

What would Priestley have wanted his audience to think of when the Inspector warns the Birlings of the "fire and blood and anguish"?

Probably he is thinking partly about the world war they had just lived through - the result of governments blindly pursuing 'national interest' at all costs. No doubt he was thinking too about the Russian revolution in which poor workers and peasants took over the state and exacted a bloody revenge against the aristocrats who had treated them so badly.

The 'pack' will be online for you today everyone.

Hope you're enjoying your Easter!