Essay and feedback

Priestley explores the theme of toxic masculinity in An Inspector Calls. Throughout the play, the men are portrayed as harsh, patriarchal, and misogynistic who see themselves as well-respected and take advantage of lower-class women (e.g., Eva Smith). Priestley explores tone as the retrospective play, written in 1945 and dated back to 1912, is used to criticise the treatment of women and the control held by the patriarchy, and to expose the gender roles at that time.

The first irresponsible character we are introduced to is Mr Birling. Priestley uses him as an embodiment of capitalism and to expose the dangers of ideology. When the Inspector interrupts the Birling home, Mr Birling describes Eva’s death as a “business” issue. This allows Mr Birling to avoid responsibility and objectifies her. He has no sense of morality and lacks empathy for her situation. The adjective “cold” also implies he only cares for his reputation and is a capitalist. He is blind to the lower classes’ treatment. Priestley warns that if we act like Mr Birling and reject morals, this could lead to social decay. Priestley portrays Mr Birling as irresponsible as he takes no accountability for his actions.

We are also introduced to Gerald, who at the start of the play is portrayed as a Prince Charming. He is a “well-bred” man which suggests he has a good reputation and the society raised him to be a capitalist. Mr Birling even says, “I don’t come into this suicide business,” foreshadowing Gerald and Mr Birling treating women as a commodity, an asset to their business rather than a moral being. Priestley presents them as irresponsible, selfish men. Gerald uses Eva Smith and leaves her when it’s no longer beneficial. His tone is cold and emotionless. Priestley creates dramatic irony and fear — using people like Birling and Gerald as capitalist symbols of exploitation. When Gerald says he “didn’t feel about her as she felt about [him],” he uses lyrical structure, showing how casual he is. Gerald is more focused on reputation than the truth, calling it “disgusting” when she cries. This implies he sees emotional expression as weak and feminine — a reflection of his misogynistic, capitalist mindset. Priestley uses Gerald to highlight the importance of emotional intelligence and criticises the lack of it. He directs this message to men — who are the ones who can change this.

Furthermore, we are shown Eric, who is arguably the most irresponsible. He is a young man who is “not quite at ease” — an impressionable character, and this is possible foreshadowing of Eric’s later actions. Eric’s lack of self-control leads to Alderman Meggarty-style abuse. He is dominant over Eva in a toxic manner and arguably rapes her; however, tries to make it seem more presentable by saying she “wasn’t in the shop” — easily justifying the act. That moment shows how deep Priestley wants to get into toxic masculinity. The stage direction “asserts” could also show a power dynamic. It shows the dominance of male characters and how toxic patriarchy was accepted. It was even justified by Birling, who accepted that idea and told Sheila to keep quiet and accept direction and submission to men.

On the other hand, Eric challenges his father’s ideologies when he says, “Why shouldn’t they try for higher wages?” He asserts his own view. This is used by Priestley to show how the younger generation are willing to change. Even though Eric is irresponsible (e.g. the sexual assault), he develops and becomes more socially responsible, siding with Sheila. He further says he “wished” he never did it. The adjective “wished” connotes true punishment and anguish and implies Eric is plagued by guilt for his actions — even though he took advantage of Eva when she was drunk, he is always the one to carry the burden and weight of his actions. Priestley intends to use Eric as a symbol of hope — that the younger generation are capable of taking full responsibility.

Lastly, we can see that Mr Birling is the most irresponsible. In this play, Priestley reveals his idiocy when he states the Titanic is “unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable.” The repetition of the phrase “unsinkable, unsinkable” suggests he is utterly convinced that it is not going to sink. However, this is wrong, as Priestley uses dramatic irony to expose the wrong ideologies made by capitalists. This could also mirror Mr Birling’s idea on capitalists — as the Titanic is an embodiment of capitalism, and he is convinced capitalism will never sink.

In addition, Mr Birling also influences each of the male characters, and it shows how capitalism enforces the patriarchy. It does not promote equality and spreads the idea that “each man is his own island.” Mr Birling is a villain in this story and acts as the embodiment of capitalism. Capitalists are also villains. This creates a tone of discomfort and fear of the monstrosity of capitalism. Mr Birling is a catalyst for capitalism and has the most impact of toxic masculinity.