Priestley wrote his play ‘An Inspector Calls’ to act as a warning for consequences of an unfair society. he did this by presenting to his socialist audience of 1945 what time was like before the two world wars and how it impacted society as a whole. He is implying that the action of social injustice and an unfair society is what caused there to be two world wars in the first place. Priestley highly criticised the previous conservative government who were uninvolved with matters like social injustice.

Priestley mocks the aims of the nouveau rich as being materialistic and a device to obtain power over the lower classes. Mr Birling states that he was “almost certain for knighthood in the next honours list.” This shows his desire for status and power and it mirrors the bourgois’ fixation on hierarchical validation and social prestige. The was emblematic to how the upper classes were always trying to retain pristine public facades over the lower classes and limit them to the working and lower class. This would be understood by the socialist audience of 1945 because most people would know the rigidness of the Edwardian class system. It was extremely hard for the lower classes to persue a life in a higher class with the limited resources that they had. Honours like knighthood were used to set a clear divide between who was the nouveua rich and who was the working class poor. This caused a severe inequality in class and made the society of the play a really unfair one as people were limited to the class that they were born in and the only people who could economically and socially progress were the aristocracy and nobility who were already born into the upper class systems. Priestley uses prestige rewards which would motivate the middle to upper classes to excel to those position and control the lower classes to a point where they themselves could not exceed their class which would make society an unfair place to live in during the time in which the play was set it.

Prietley uses Mrs Birling in a similar key moment in the play but the message conveyed is harder to spot and it was a deeper meaning than just extrinsic rewards which would given to the meddle to upper classes by the monarchy and the laissez-faire government. Mrs Birling was a character who liked to set the opinions of her family and always wanted to keep order in the family and outside in the wider world. “You know, of course, that my husband was Lord mayor” the use of the phrase ‘you know’ indicates that the Inspector should know this fact for the sole reason. that the Birlings were a well known family in the upper classes but Mrs Birling assumes that everyone should know this meaningless statement. Mrs Birling likes to use direct address to stabilise her family’s position in social hierarchy. The fact that she tries to dismiss her family’s wrongdoings by stating her claim to power in the Edwardian hierarchical system highlights her extreme bourgois like characteristics and how class plays a huge role in Mrs Birling’s character and position in the play. This is evident as he capitalist, highly conservative government at the time were often used as a status quo to justify immoral actions like firing Eva Smith or rejecting her access to the charity. Priestley highlights how politics played a massive role in creating a class divide between upper and lower class but also creating an unfair and a modernly recognised, unjust society.

Priestley hints at the character of Eric which was followed by the opening scenes of the play. The audience might have interpreted that Eric is just a young character who is a bit immature but Priestley foreshadows the deeper person that Eric is. Sheila had a very materialistic and childish personality at the start of the play. The remark that she makes on Eric, “You’re Squiffy” shows how unserious her tone was. The importance of understanding that Eric and Sheila were both immature at the start of the play will help identify their differences and how this links to the wider picture of the Edwardian British society. Although Sheila’s comment did not mean to cause trouble, Eric takes this as an attack to him. Eric serious tone to a small, meaningless comment indicates to the audience that he might actually be a little bit squiffy which shows that he might be a bit out of control. Since the audience is watching in 1945, they would understand that Eric has gone a bit too far in the his drinking habits whereas an audience of the time in which the play was set in wouldn’t clearly understand the immorality of Eric’s actions. Being a little bit squiffy was broadly accepted by the Edwardian people who thought that this wasn’t a problem for an upper class male and it shows that clear antithesis between Eric’s expectations and the expectations of people from the lower classes. If someone in the lower class were a bit squiffy, they would be seen as a mess and out of control but because the audience of 1945 are more equal in terms of the way they see people in society, they would understand that problems that could come with Eric’s out of control type of state. This seemingly small remark could also be moment where Priestley mocks the upper classes by hinting that these small actions would collectively lead to greater conflicts not just within society but in the world as a whole like the two world wars. Priestley spots out the flaws in the unsrupulous rich and warns to his audience that the unfair society of 1912 caused almost world breaking conflicts.

Finally, Priestley uses the idea of circumlocution to outline the unsrupulous upper classes and how their action of dehumanisation causes conflict within society. It was widely agreed upon that The Inspector was Priestley’s voice throughout the play as a whole. This allows The Inspector to be empathising of the lower classes to try and restore the equality in society. The Inspector critiques the handling of Eva Smith within the Birling family and describes her treatment was “As if she was an animal, a thing, not a person.” Priestley uses circumlocution to show how Eric affected Eva’s life without being explicit. This dehumanises Eva to a mere ‘thing’ which holds minimal purpose in society rather than a person. This is evident because the class system in the time of 1912 was heavily against the working classes and Eva was a microcosm of the working class which meant that it was understood why Priestley would have wanted to highlight her exploitation and the impact it had on her life as a whole. Priestley wasn’t clearly explicit in his writing and this is frequent all throughout the play. This not only engages the audience by making them think, it was brings many people to conclusions as to why this happened in the past and what people can do in the present day and the future to fix the issues in an unfair society. Overall, Priestley uses a microcosm in Eva Smith to show the problematic system in the Edwardian period and what people should do to solve the issue of social injustice.

As a whole, Priestley uses a wide range of techniques to engage the audience and make people understand what the problems were in the society of 1912 and what people after world war two could do to ensure that issues like this cannot overtake society once again. This is evident as Priestley was a socialist who cared for the equality in treatment of all people of all backgrounds and classes in British society and all over the world the prevent the outbreak of larger scale conflicts from small feuds of class to an outright war between countries and regions.