Wednesday, 21 May 2014
Post questions here by 7!
As always, if anyone has been on this blog and hasn't got the answers they're looking for, quickly post a question under any of the posts and I will answer it by 8PM tonight.
SECTION B - THE UNSEEN POEM
I will try and put everything you need to answer Section B into 1 post so that you don't have loads to read.
Section B is worth less marks than section A. You should only spend about 30 minutes on it.
Realistically, you will only be able to plan and write about 5/6 paragraphs.
The question(s) will be about a poem which you will not have seen or read before. That is the whole point.
If the question is in multiple parts, have a look how much each part is worth. Make sure you split up your time in accordance with how many marks each question is worth. More marks = more time.
The question will ask you something like,
"What do you learn from the poem about...."
"How does the poet present his ideas about...."
The important part of the question is the bit at the end, because this will refer to the poem in particular.
So then, with that in mind, all you have to do is go through the poem with your highlighter and look out for all the following things:
Structure
What is the structure of the poem like? Does this link to the question?
*If the structure or rhyme scheme is regular or constant, it could be a clue that the poet thinks whatever is going on in the poem is quite normal, happy, regular, constant etc.
*If the structure is unpredictable, or there is no real rhyme scheme, then it is usually a clue that the poet wants you to look more closely at what is going on in the poem. Usually there is something unusual or untidy going on in the poem.
*Has the poet repeated any important words?
*Has the poet used enjambment?
*Look at the words which are first and last in each stanza/line. Are these important? Have they been placed there for a reason?
Language
What sort of groups of words (lexical field) has the poet used? Does this link to the question?
*For example, has the poet used lots of words about a particular subject like death/money/love/work/emotions/religion etc? Highlight them, and link them all together.
Which words has the poet used that really stand out?
*Has the poet used any large/unusual/interesting words that link to the question? Highlught them and point them out.
Imagery
Has the poet used any SIMILES, METAPHORS, PERSONIFICATIONS, ALLITERATION or ONOMATOPOEIA which remind you of the question?
Then, once you have found yourself about 5-6 different points from the poem, start turning these points into PEE paragraphs using the normal method:
POINT - The first thing the poet has done which links to the question is....
EVIDENCE - We can see this where it says..." QUOTE " (Try to use more than one quote if possible)
EXPLAIN - This links to the question because...
Write about 6 of these and you're done!
Section B is worth less marks than section A. You should only spend about 30 minutes on it.
Realistically, you will only be able to plan and write about 5/6 paragraphs.
The question(s) will be about a poem which you will not have seen or read before. That is the whole point.
If the question is in multiple parts, have a look how much each part is worth. Make sure you split up your time in accordance with how many marks each question is worth. More marks = more time.
The question will ask you something like,
"What do you learn from the poem about...."
"How does the poet present his ideas about...."
The important part of the question is the bit at the end, because this will refer to the poem in particular.
So then, with that in mind, all you have to do is go through the poem with your highlighter and look out for all the following things:
Structure
What is the structure of the poem like? Does this link to the question?
*If the structure or rhyme scheme is regular or constant, it could be a clue that the poet thinks whatever is going on in the poem is quite normal, happy, regular, constant etc.
*If the structure is unpredictable, or there is no real rhyme scheme, then it is usually a clue that the poet wants you to look more closely at what is going on in the poem. Usually there is something unusual or untidy going on in the poem.
*Has the poet repeated any important words?
*Has the poet used enjambment?
*Look at the words which are first and last in each stanza/line. Are these important? Have they been placed there for a reason?
Language
What sort of groups of words (lexical field) has the poet used? Does this link to the question?
*For example, has the poet used lots of words about a particular subject like death/money/love/work/emotions/religion etc? Highlight them, and link them all together.
Which words has the poet used that really stand out?
*Has the poet used any large/unusual/interesting words that link to the question? Highlught them and point them out.
Imagery
Has the poet used any SIMILES, METAPHORS, PERSONIFICATIONS, ALLITERATION or ONOMATOPOEIA which remind you of the question?
Then, once you have found yourself about 5-6 different points from the poem, start turning these points into PEE paragraphs using the normal method:
POINT - The first thing the poet has done which links to the question is....
EVIDENCE - We can see this where it says..." QUOTE " (Try to use more than one quote if possible)
EXPLAIN - This links to the question because...
Write about 6 of these and you're done!
''Hour' - Carol Ann Duffy
Context
Carol Ann Duffy is the first female Poet Laureate (2009), and probably the best known female poet working in Britain today. She was born in 1955 in Glasgow. Duffy is well known for poems that give a voice to the dispossessed (people excluded from society); she encourages the reader to put themselves in the shoes of people they might normally dismiss.Her poetry often engages with the grittier and more disturbing side of life, using black humour like a weapon to make social and political points. Her place on the GCSE syllabus caused controversy in 2008, when a complaint was made about the poem Education for Leisure; she responded with typical wit and intelligence with the poem Mrs Schofield’s GCSE.
Hour was published in the collection Rapture (2005) which explores the highs and lows of a romantic relationship.
Subject
Hour is about the feelings that arise from spending time with a loved one. The poem suggests that to be with a loved one, even for just an hour, is precious and valuable. It also presents the traditional idea of time as an obstacle to lovers.Structure and language
Structure
Hour follows the structure of a Shakespearean sonnet: it has fourteen lines and a predictable rhyme scheme (a-b-a-b-c-d-c-d-e-f-e-f-g-g). Sonnets often use a final rhyming couplet to offer a 'turn' in the meaning; however, Duffy only offers a partial turn, which is confirmation of the idea that love will always triumph by finding unlikely sources of value.Language
Hour has many references to money and riches, contrasting the concept of material wealth and possessions against love and time spent with a loved one.Line three puns on the word
"spend", and is typical of the way in which the poem investigates the themes of love and money:
We find an hour together, spend it not on flowersOr wine, but the whole of the summer sky and a grass ditch.
The traditional territory of lovers ("Flowers"and
"wine") is replaced by alternatives: for example,
"a grass ditch"is an improbable romantic location. There is simplicity and perfection to
"the whole of the summer sky", an image rich in meaning, a visual feast for a loving couple lying down together and looking up. They enjoy the
"Midas light". (Midas was the mythical king whose touch turned things to gold.)
As the poem's title suggests, time is an important consideration for the lovers.
"For thousands of seconds we kiss"is a striking phrase, offering the idea of excess -
"thousands"- with the limitation of available time, measured in seconds. This precise measurement indicates how precious time is to the speaker, a
"treasure"to be carefully counted.
The pleasure and riches that the couple gather in an hour allow them to feel as if they are frozen in time:
"Time slows, for here/we are millionaires, backhanding the night". The hour spent together in the golden light gives them a sense of power, making them feel as if they can bribe the darkness to hold back, giving the lovers immense joy and wealth.
There is a contrast between images traditionally seen as romantic (or associated with wealth) and the ordinary:
"Flowers"and
"grass ditch"compare to a
"jewel"and
"cuckoo spit"(insect eggs left on long grass);
"sunlight"contrasts with a
"chandelier";
"gold"contrasts with
"straw". These contrasts emphasise the romance of the lovers' time together. Traditional ideas are shown to be unimportant compared to the personal experience of the two characters.
Hour also makes frequent references to images of light in contrast to the night and the darkness of inevitable separation. These include:
"Bright",
"summer sky",
"Midas light",
"shining hour",
"candle",
"chandelier or spotlight". Duffy uses light to suggest a positive, warm, optimistic liaison. Rather than dwelling on the darkness of separation the lovers make the most of the time they have together.
In the final stanza there is a single-word sentence
"Now.". It is simple, like the lovers' situation, and yet has a strong sense of being complete; nothing more is needed. It celebrates the moment rather than dwelling on the future or the past.
'Sister Maude' - Christina Rossetti
Context
Christina Rossetti (1830-1894) is remembered as one of the Pre-Raphaelites, a group of 19th century artists and writers who took inspiration from works of art produced in the Middle Ages. Sister Maude draws on the traditional folk tale of two sisters feuding over a lover. The Victorians were keen on folk traditions, and lots of poetry from the period makes use of traditional source material.Sister Maude describes the death of a loved one caused by the actions of a jealous sister. The poem is ambiguous but hints strongly that jealousy and betrayal led to the death of a sister's lover. The poem is written from the point of view of the betrayed sister, left alone without her loved one, who was coveted by Maude. The speaker believes that even if she hadn't been born her dead lover would
"never have looked at"Maude, and perhaps this provided motivation for Maude to destroy the lovers' relationship.
Structure and language
Structure
Each stanza contains even lines that rhyme; this regular pattern helps to reinforce the traditional source for the poem because older poetry is often characterised by the use of strict structural devices like rhyme, rhythm and even line and stanza lengths.Of the five stanzas in the poem, four have four lines. The fifth stanza offers an extra two lines in which there is a turn, after which the mood of the poem subtly alters.
Language
The third line makes use of a break in the centre (a technique called 'caesura') to reflect the speaker's outrage and anger that
"Maude, my sister Maude"could have deliberately caused such a tragedy. The repetition of
"Maude"also adds to the strength of the narrator's feelings.
There are frequent religious references in the poem, reflecting conventions within society at the time in which the poem was written, as well as the seriousness of the events described. Maude has committed such a terrible deed that, rather than going to heaven, her sister tells her,
"Bide you with death and sin". The narrator feels that Maude deserves the eternal punishment of hell.
The regular rhythm of the poem is broken by a shorter line in line 16, highlighting Maude's destiny:
My father may sleep in Paradise,My mother at Heaven-gate;But sister Maude shall get no sleepEither early or late.
Alliteration is used in the poem to communicate the feelings of the speaker. In the second stanza she describes the body of her dead lover using several repetitions of the letter 'c', the hard sound echoing her outburst. In the final two lines there is alliteration of 's' sounds, mimicking the hissing satisfaction that the speaker feels at the prospect of her sister going to hell.
William Shakespeare: Sonnet 116
Context
As well as writing plays, William Shakespeare is also remembered for his poetry, especially sonnets. This poem is part of Shakespeare's famous collection of poems (a sonnet sequence), consisting of 154 poems. They are about topics such as love and time. The structure of the poems has become the popular format for the sonnet, also called the Shakespearean sonnet.This poem is about love, not between a speaker and his lover, but as a concept or idea. The poem explores what is meant by love, and proposes that, if it is true, love is one of life's constants which does not change with time or circumstance.
Structure and language
Structure
The Shakespearean sonnet has 14 lines divided into three stanzas of four lines each and a final couplet. The rhyme scheme can be described as a-b-a-b, c-d-c-d, e-f-e-f, g-g. This predictability and use of a regular pattern is frequently found in older poetry as writers tended to stick to the restrictions of a set format. This poem follows the conventional structure and includes the usual 'turn' at the end - a pair of lines (or couplet) that either shifts the mood or meaning of the poem, or asserts some sort of revelation.Language
Sonnet 116 uses repeated pairs of words:"love is not love",
"alters when it alteration finds"and
"remover to remove"are examples from the first three lines. This mirroring of words is suggestive of a loving couple. As well as pairs of words, there are some opposites and negatives used to stress the qualities of love by saying what it is not: true love can observe storms (
"tempests") and not be affected;
"Love's not Time's fool".
Shakespeare uses metaphors based on natural elements: love
"looks on tempests and is never shaken"and
"is the star to every wand'ring bark". So love is presented as an essential part of our physical world; it's a fixed point of light in the sky - a
"star"- guiding a boat (
"wand'ring bark") lost at sea.
The opening lines of the poem echo the conventional Christian marriage service and they stress the idea that love (
"the marriage of true minds") should be without
"impediments"or barriers and obstacles. These lines can also be interpreted as meaning that love, if it is true, should be without fault.
"unshaken"by storms,
"Love alters not"- it is a constant, an
"ever-fixed mark", just as a
"star"is reliably found in the night sky.
As well as not changing appearance or position, love
"bears it out even to the edge of doom". Shakespeare is using language associated with extremes to show the power of love, confirming love as a positive force that triumphs over the prospect of
"doom".
'Harmonium' - Simon Armitage
This is a poem about a man who is apparently buying an old harmonium (a type of old organ) from his local church because it isn't used anymore. The speaker in the poem is sad, in a way, because he thinks about how important this organ probably was back in the days, when families went to church together. Now, the church is empty, and the church are letting him buy it 'for a song'. Not much money.
Colloquial language is used to create an informal, friendly and conversational tone. In the first stanza the harmonium is
The colloquial language is also combined with puns associated with music. As well as the example above, the sound of the harmonium
The harmonium is given human qualities throughout the poem: the keys are
There is careful observation of the instrument, the organist and the speaker's father to create atmosphere and associations with the past. The holes in the
Although the poem is literally about a musical instrument, it is also about ageing and how a son takes the place of his father as time passes. The speaker uses parallelism, a form of repetition in which syntax (structure of words in a sentence) is repeated:
The personality of the speaker is reflected in the final three lines. The narrator's father suggests that the next thing carried from the church will be his own coffin; the speaker responds:
The poem is possibly about regret too. The harmonium is
The writing of the poem might redress (set right) this sense of failure, however, by aiming to recreate the beautiful music and community spirit associated with the harmonium.
Context
Simon Armitage is famous for his use of colloquial (every day, informal) language and the inclusion of autobiographical material in his poems. Family is an important topic for Armitage, as is music. This poem combines the two subjects.Subject
The harmonium is a musical organ (usually found in a church) that is played using keys and foot pedals. The poem tells the story of someone rescuing a harmonium from being"bundled off to the skip". The narrator needs the help of his father to carry the instrument away from the church.
Structure and language
Structure
The poem has four stanzas of varying lengths. The first stanza describes the harmonium as it stands, ready to be discarded. The next is a closer investigation of the instrument, with detailed descriptions of its parts. The third stanza considers the history of the instrument. The final stanza, which describes carrying the harmonium from the church, is concerned with the relationship between the speaker and his father.Language
Armitage uses brand names and place names frequently in his poetry, rooting it in the modern world and bringing an element of reality and honesty to his work. In this poem the brand of the organ is mentioned - a Farrand Chapelette - as well as the place it's from, Marsden Church (Marsden is a large village in West Yorkshire).Colloquial language is used to create an informal, friendly and conversational tone. In the first stanza the harmonium is
"gathering dust", about to be
"bundled off to the skip"or sold
"for a song"(cheaply). This technique creates a sense of honesty and deceptive simplicity.
The colloquial language is also combined with puns associated with music. As well as the example above, the sound of the harmonium
"still struck a chord"- both literally as the instrument still plays, but also because it triggers thoughts of the past, specifically of fathers and sons singing in the church choir.
Imagery
The third stanza uses an interesting metaphor to describe the choir. The singers"opened their throats/and gilded finches - like high notes - had streamed out". The metaphor of the voices sounding like golden birds is combined with a simile of the
"high notes"to create a very positive and joyful image of the past.
The harmonium is given human qualities throughout the poem: the keys are
"fingernails";
"one of its notes has lost its tongue"; and it is carried out
"laid on its back". The position of the instrument in the church, like an important member of the congregation or community, was once significant.
There is careful observation of the instrument, the organist and the speaker's father to create atmosphere and associations with the past. The holes in the
"treadles"(foot pedals) prompt an image of the organist's feet, socks and shoes. These have
"pedalled and pedalled", a repetition bringing to mind both the playing of the instrument and time passing. Line 19 has a similarly close observation of the father's
"smoker's fingers and dottled thumbs".
Although the poem is literally about a musical instrument, it is also about ageing and how a son takes the place of his father as time passes. The speaker uses parallelism, a form of repetition in which syntax (structure of words in a sentence) is repeated:
"And he, being him, ... And I, being me,". This use of a repetition intensifies the relationship between father and son.
The personality of the speaker is reflected in the final three lines. The narrator's father suggests that the next thing carried from the church will be his own coffin; the speaker responds:
And I, being me, then mouth in replySome shallow or sorry phrase or wordToo starved of breath to make itself heard.
The two pairs of indefinite descriptions "shallow or sorry"and
"phrase or word"are vague and imprecise, and the narrator's lack of breath means whatever he has said is not heard. This suggests a sense of the speaker's feelings of inadequacy. Is he up to the job of
"replacing"his father? Or perhaps the speaker is upset and tongue-tied at the thought of his father's death. He could also, of course, be breathless from the exertion of lifting the heavy organ!
Attitudes, themes and ideas
The poem is a celebration of a musical instrument and its role for generations in the local church and wider community. The poem is mostly about the relationship between father and son, however, and the way in which life is cyclical - a son becomes a father and he in turn becomes a father,"each in their time".
The poem is possibly about regret too. The harmonium is
"gathering dust/in the shadowy porch", and by saving the instrument there is an attempt to preserve the memories it provokes in the speaker. The final lines have a sense of failure about them, as if the speaker feels something has been lost which he is unable to recapture.
The writing of the poem might redress (set right) this sense of failure, however, by aiming to recreate the beautiful music and community spirit associated with the harmonium.
'In Paris With You' - James Fenton
This is a poem about a couple who go to Paris together. However, instead of being all romantic and loved up, they seem to have a bit of a strange relationship where they don't want to do all the romantic stuff. The speaker of the poem seems to have been hurt in the past, and needs time to get to know the other person. In the end, they get to know each other quite well by just spending time together in their room!
In Paris with You is recounted by a (the narrator) whose relationship has just ended and who is now in Paris with someone else (
The poem has a regular rhyme scheme in the four stanzas, adding to the poem's musical quality. The rhyme scheme in these four stanzas can be described as a-b-c-c-b (with the final b in the extra line of the last stanza). The stanza in the centre of the poem makes use of half rhyme. The contrasting rhyme of
The poem is written in the first person and addresses a lover. There are lines that hint at a conversation with a lover, but we only hear one person's side of the dialogue:
There is a repeated use of colloquial (everyday) language, suggesting this is an informal, honest poem. Phrases such as
Word play is another technique used to generate humour. The speaker refers to his weariness at having to talk about his failed relationship:
The final stanza repeats
The poem is about surfacing from a long-term relationship but not thinking about it in the aftermath. It is about enjoying a time of closeness without having to take responsibility for the past or the future.
In Paris with You rejects the traditional concerns of romance. The famous sights of the usually romantic city of Paris are unimportant to the narrator:
Context
James Fenton is a modern poet who has worked as a political journalist. He is well known for writing war poetry as well as poems that deal with relationships. His style is characterised by word play and a use of traditional forms of poetry such as ballads, sonnets and lyrics (words set to music).In Paris with You is recounted by a (the narrator) whose relationship has just ended and who is now in Paris with someone else (
"I'm on the rebound"). This suggests a long-term relationship has ended and the speaker is currently enjoying a less serious liaison. The narrator doesn't want to examine the aftermath of the serious relationship: he doesn't want to talk things over or even visit galleries or landmarks; he just wants to enjoy the moment rather than thinking of the future or the past.
Structure and language
Structure
The poem has four stanzas of five or six lines, with a longer stanza of nine lines in the centre, acting as a chorus in which the mood of the poem changes. The first half of the poem deals with the lead up to the current situation; the second half is concerned with enjoying the present. The repeated line"I'm in Paris with you"- and variations on it - can be described as a refrain (lines that are repeated in a song). The use of repetition reflects the speaker's insistent concentration on the present.
The poem has a regular rhyme scheme in the four stanzas, adding to the poem's musical quality. The rhyme scheme in these four stanzas can be described as a-b-c-c-b (with the final b in the extra line of the last stanza). The stanza in the centre of the poem makes use of half rhyme. The contrasting rhyme of
"Elysees"and
"sleazy"gives a comic effect.
Language
In Paris with You opens with an emphatic negative:"Don't talk to me of love". The speaker has
"had an earful"and wants to stop thinking about love. The line is repeated at the start of two more stanzas. However, this is not a negative poem but one which celebrates the intimacy of a relationship.
The poem is written in the first person and addresses a lover. There are lines that hint at a conversation with a lover, but we only hear one person's side of the dialogue:
"Yes I'm angry"and
"Am I embarrassing you?"The poem seems even more intimate; we are almost made to feel as if we're eavesdropping.
There is a repeated use of colloquial (everyday) language, suggesting this is an informal, honest poem. Phrases such as
"had an earful",
"downed a drink or two",
"say sod off to sodding Notre Dame"and
"Doing this and that"make the poem down-to-earth. Such language also contrasts with the falsely poetic tone often found in literature about love, replacing it to comic effect.
Word play is another technique used to generate humour. The speaker refers to his weariness at having to talk about his failed relationship:
"I'm one of your talking wounded", a pun on the phrase 'walking wounded' (used in the context of war), which he then rhymes with
"maroonded", a partly nonsense word used to maintain the rhyme scheme. This brings a fun and inventive tone to the poem.
The final stanza repeats
"I'm in Paris with..."four times, and offers both comical and sensual references to the speaker's enthusiasm for the person he is with. The line
"Am I embarrassing you?"adds to the sense of the exuberant, teasing attitude of the speaker.
Attitudes, themes and ideas
"I'm in Paris with you"is a mantra (a repeated sound or phrase that can transform you) which contains the key theme of enjoying the present.
In Paris with You rejects the traditional concerns of romance. The famous sights of the usually romantic city of Paris are unimportant to the narrator:
Do you mind if we do not go to the Louvre,If we say sod off to sodding Notre Dame,If we skip the Champs Elysées
Instead the speaker concentrates on the "sleazy/Old hotel room"with its
"crack across the ceiling"in which the
"walls are peeling". These details are unique to the narrator's experience of being in Paris with a lover -
"I'm in Paris with the slightest thing you do"- which sums up the poem's message: being together is far more important than typical romantic locations and analytical conversations.
POETRY EXAM - EXAMPLE ANSWER FOR SECTION A
How are relationships between people presented an ‘In Paris
With You’ and another poem of your choice? (Sister Maude)
The first thing I noticed about the two poems is that they
both talk about love. In ‘In Pairs with you’ the love between the couple is
unusual because the poet says ‘Don’t talk to me of love’. This is unusual
because they are in Paris, which most people see as the city of love, so
something unusual is obviously happening. Similarly, in ‘Sister Maude’ there is
obviously an unusual relationship between the two sisters because she dislikes
her sister and wants her to suffer. We know this because it says, ‘Sister Maude
will get no sleep’ which shows that she wants her to be panicked. It is unusual
for two sisters to dislike each other so much.
The second way that we can compare the poems is that they
both use metaphors to show their feelings. In ‘In Paris With You’, the speaker
says ‘I’m a hostage’, which shows that
he feels trapped by the love he feels. In the same way, in ‘Sister Maude’, the
speaker says ‘You might have spared my soul’, which shows that the speaker
feels very betrayed by her sister. Both poems exaggerate to get their point
across.
A third way that we can compare the two poems is that they
both use repetition to get their point across. In ‘In Paris With You’, the
speaker repeats the word ‘don’t’ to show that he is not 100% happy about the
way the relationship is going. Similarly, in ‘Sister Maude’, the speaker often
repeats the words ‘Sister Maude’ , which is the title of the poem, to remind
the reader how close she should be to her sister. This shows us how much she
feels she has been let down by her sister.
One way that they are different is when we compare the
structure of the two poems. ‘In Paris With You’ has a very unusual structure,
with stanzas and lines of different lengths. This suggest to the reader that
the relationship in the poem is unusual and does not have much structure to it
either. In ‘Sister Maude’, the structure is much more what you would expect,
except for the last stanza where there is an extra two lines. These two lines
are really important because it talks about how Sister Maude will go to hell.
The structure draws the reader’s attention to this.
Another difference between the poems is the sort of subjects
that they both talk about. In ‘Sister Maude’, there is lots of reference to God
and religion. We see this where it says ‘My Father may sleep in Paradise, my
mother at heaven’s gate.’ This exaggerates how evil she thinks her sister is.
On the other hand, in ‘In Paris With You’, the speaker uses much more basic,
even amusing language such as ‘Sod off to the sodding Notre Dame’. This shows
the reader that their relationship is much more relaxed and modern.
If you can do this, you'll get a decent amount of marks!
NW
POETRY EXAM - REVISE THESE POEMS
The following poems from the RELATIONSHIPS cluster have not been used on this exam before, or for a long time:
'Hour' Carol Ann Duffy
'In Paris With You' James Fenton
'Harmonium' Simon Armitage
'Sonnet 116' William Shakespeare
'Sister Maude' Christina Rossetti
I will put notes on the blog to revise these poems.
NW
'Hour' Carol Ann Duffy
'In Paris With You' James Fenton
'Harmonium' Simon Armitage
'Sonnet 116' William Shakespeare
'Sister Maude' Christina Rossetti
I will put notes on the blog to revise these poems.
NW
POETRY EXAM - Section A
This exam is in TWO sections.
Section A is on poems which you are allowed to read in advance
Section B is on an unseen poem.
Section A
You will be give a CHOICE of two questions. Do not answer them both. These questions will always ask you two talk about one of the poems from a particular cluster. Most of you have not read these poems yet, but this does not mean that you can't answer the question. On this blog, I will give you some basic notes on a selection of these poems.
In this section, you just need to look at the poem which is named in the question, and compare it to another one in the same cluster.
The questions will ask you about a particular subject such as:
RELATIONSHIPS
FEELINGS
CONFLICT
ANGER
EMOTIONS
or something like that.
USE THESE QUESTIONS TO REVISE
All you need to do is read both poems and talk about how they show that particular theme.
So look for the following kinds of things:
Do both poems use really interesting vocabulary?
Do both poems use Similes and metaphors?
Do both poems say things which make you feel happy/ sad?
Do both poems use small/short sentences or lines to show stress or anger?
Do both poems talk about the senses a lot?
Do both poems repeat certain words or phrases?
Do both poems look unusual or have a strange rhyme scheme? (remember, if a poem has an unusual structure, it usually means there is something going on in the poem which is unusual. If a poem has a very normal structure or rhyme, it usually means that everything which is going on in the poem is normal too.)
(you can use these comparisons more than once)
Once you have highlighted about 4 or 5 things that these poems have in common, just turn your points into PEE paragraphs. You are all BRILLIANT at PEE now. You have done it a lot over the last few weeks!
Section A is on poems which you are allowed to read in advance
Section B is on an unseen poem.
Section A
You will be give a CHOICE of two questions. Do not answer them both. These questions will always ask you two talk about one of the poems from a particular cluster. Most of you have not read these poems yet, but this does not mean that you can't answer the question. On this blog, I will give you some basic notes on a selection of these poems.
In this section, you just need to look at the poem which is named in the question, and compare it to another one in the same cluster.
The questions will ask you about a particular subject such as:
RELATIONSHIPS
FEELINGS
CONFLICT
ANGER
EMOTIONS
or something like that.
USE THESE QUESTIONS TO REVISE
All you need to do is read both poems and talk about how they show that particular theme.
So look for the following kinds of things:
Do both poems use really interesting vocabulary?
Do both poems use Similes and metaphors?
Do both poems say things which make you feel happy/ sad?
Do both poems use small/short sentences or lines to show stress or anger?
Do both poems talk about the senses a lot?
Do both poems repeat certain words or phrases?
Do both poems look unusual or have a strange rhyme scheme? (remember, if a poem has an unusual structure, it usually means there is something going on in the poem which is unusual. If a poem has a very normal structure or rhyme, it usually means that everything which is going on in the poem is normal too.)
(you can use these comparisons more than once)
Once you have highlighted about 4 or 5 things that these poems have in common, just turn your points into PEE paragraphs. You are all BRILLIANT at PEE now. You have done it a lot over the last few weeks!
Monday, 19 May 2014
Signing Off Now
I will check back here at 9PM.
If there is anything else you want me to add for you, just join the blogger website and post a question I'll get it on by half 9.
NW
If there is anything else you want me to add for you, just join the blogger website and post a question I'll get it on by half 9.
NW
LAST ONE: An idea of how to plan your essay
This is how I would plan your essay if it was about the theme of RESPONSIBILITY...
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 into 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 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.
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 into 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 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.
10 KEY QUOTES
- BIRLING
- A friend of mine went over this new liner last week - the Titanic - she sails next week - forty-six thousand eight hundred tons - forty-six thousand eight hundred tons - New York in five days - and every luxury - and unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable.
- Act One
- Priestley's love of dramatic irony is biting here, and his irony is never more satirical than in these comments of Birling's, which, to his original audience in 1946, must have seemed more controversial than they do today because the sinking of the ship was within people's memory. Symbolically, just as the Titanic is destined to sink, so too is Birling's political ideology, under the Inspector's interrogation. The ship was a titan of the seas, and its imminent failure "next week" suggests the dangers of capitalistic hubris, illustrating the risk of the entrepreneur.
- GERALD [laughs]: You seem to be a nice well-behaved family -
BIRLING: We think we are -Act OneComing early in the play, these lines also exemplify Priestley's love of dramatic irony: the last thing the Birlings have been is well-behaved. These lines also suggest the alliance between Gerald and Birling, two men who share the same values, whose bond will become stronger after the Inspector's exit. - BIRLING
But take my word for it, you youngsters - and I've learnt in the good hard school of experience - that a man has to mind his own business and look after himself and his own - and -
We hear the sharp ring of a front door bell.Act OneBirling is taking an individualist, capitalist point of view about personal responsibility, and his lines here provide the general attitude of his speeches since the play began. According to him, experience proves that his point of view is correct, in contrast to the possibly more idealistic "youngsters." Yet, the bell marks the moment at which the Inspector arrives, and it is no accident that the socialist-leaning Inspector arrives at precisely this moment. - INSPECTOR
... what happened to her then may have determined what happened to her afterwards, and what happened to her afterwards may have driven her to suicide. A chain of events.Act OneIn this fascinating excerpt, the Inspector outlines the nature of the moral crime the Birlings and Gerald have committed against Eva. Each of them is responsible in part for her death, and together they are entirely responsible. This construction is itself a metaphor for Priestley's insistence that we are all bound up together and responsible communally for everyone's survival. Note, too, that the repetition in the Inspector's lines reflect the "chain" he is talking about. - SHEILA
[laughs rather hysterically]
Why - you fool - he knows. Of course he knows. And I hate to think how much he knows that we don't know yet. You'll see. You'll see. She looks at him almost in triumph.Act OneSheila, shortly before the end of Act One, crucially understands the importance of the Inspector and the fact that he has more information than he is revealing. She is the first person in the play to really begin to understand the Inspector which, in turn, leads her to see her relationship with Gerald in a more realistic, more cynical way. - INSPECTOR
Yes, Mr. Croft - in the stalls bar at the Palace Variety Theatre...
GERALD
I happened to look in, one night, after a rather long dull day, and as the show wasn't very bright, I went down into the bar for a drink. It's a favorite haunt of women of the town -
MRS. BIRLING
Women of the town?
BIRLING
Yes, yes. But I see no point in mentioning the subject ....Act TwoEva Smith, by the time she encounters Eric in the Palace bar, seems to be working as a prostitute, and indeed, the fact that the Palace bar is a location known for prostitutes looking for business is here partly mentioned but partly suppressed. Moreover, this information points out the streetwise character of Gerald Croft, and it might even lead to questions about precisely what he was doing in that bar, at night, other than just happening to "look in" after a "dull day" and having "a drink." - INSPECTOR
She kept a rough sort of diary. And she said there that she had to go away and be quiet and remember "just to make it last longer." She felt there'd never be anything as good again for her - so she had to make it last longer.Act TwoThis is an unusually personal moment from the Inspector, who gives us one of the first insights into Eva Smith's feelings and personality. He claims, of course, that he has found a diary in Eva Smith's room, though many interpretations have argued that the Inspector in fact has a more personal connection to Eva Smith: perhaps he even is her ghost, or a ghoulish embodiment of her dead child? Priestley never tells us, but there is certainly opportunity for the actor in this part to suggest a more personal connection. Note, too, the interest in time on Eva's part, keeping a diary and making a point of remembering the past nostalgically. - BIRLING
You'll apologize at once ... I'm a public man -
INSPECTOR [massively]
Public men, Mr. Birling, have responsibilities as well as privileges.Act TwoHere the Inspector, who by this middle act of the play is gaining in power and control over the situation, "massively" silences Birling with a putdown. It is not the first or last time that Birling is cut off mid-thought. It is also important because Priestley points an extra finger of blame at Birling not just for his actions, but for his failure to see that his public position entails a duty of responsibility to other people. Interestingly, this attitude draws on the traditional notion of the upper classes taking responsibility for the welfare of the lower classes, but in the newer, more democratic life of Britain, the "public men" are not necessarily of higher social class even if they have more public privileges; at any rate, their position of power comes with responsibility. - INSPECTOR
We don't live alone. We are members of one body. We are responsible for each other. And I tell you that the time will soon come when, if men will not learn that lesson, then they will be taught it in fire and blood and anguish. Good night.Act ThreeThe Inspector's final lines, from a longer speech he makes shortly before his exit, are a blistering delivery of Priestley's socialist message. Moreover, his promise of "fire and blood and anguish" also looks forward to the First and Second World Wars, a resonance, which, to Priestley's 1946 audience, must have been quite chilling. - BIRLING
... we've been had ... it makes all the difference.
GERALD
Of course!
SHEILA [bitterly]
I suppose we're all nice people now.Act ThreeThese lines illustrate the mood of this last part of the play, as well as the split between the Birlings and their children. Sheila and Eric realize the importance of the Inspector's lesson, notably that they need to become more socially responsible whether or not the particular scenario was a valid example. In contrast, their parents absolutely fail to learn such a lesson, arguing that the failure of the example invalidates the Inspector's argument. Why still feel guilty and responsible? It also is significant that Gerald Croft takes Birling's side (uncritically) rather than Sheila's.
CHARACTERS IN AN INSPECTOR CALLS
Arthur Birling
Husband of Sybil, father of Sheila and Eric. Priestley describes him as a "heavy-looking man" in his mid-fifties, with easy manners but "rather provincial in his speech." He is the owner of Birling and Company, some sort of factory business which employs several girls to work on (presumably sewing) machines. He is a Magistrate and, two years ago, was Lord Mayor of Brumley. He thus is a man of some standing in the town. He describes himself as a "hard-headed practical man of business," and he is firmly capitalist, even right-wing, in his political views.
Gerald Croft
Engaged to be married to Sheila. His parents, Sir George and Lady Croft, are above the Birlings socially, and it seems his mother disapproves of his engagement to Sheila. He is, Priestley says, "an attractive chap about thirty ... very much the easy well-bred young-man-about-town." He works for his father's company, Crofts Limited, which seems to be both bigger and older than Birling and Company.
Sheila Birling
Engaged to be married to Gerald. Daughter of Arthur Birling and Sybil Birling, and sister of Eric. Priestley describes her as "a pretty girl in her early twenties, very pleased with life and rather excited," which is precisely how she comes across in the first act of the play. In the second and third acts, however, following the realization of the part she has played in Eva Smith's life, she matures and comes to realize the importance of the Inspector's message.
Sybil Birling
Married to Arthur. Mother of Sheila and Eric. Priestley has her "about fifty, a rather cold woman," and--significantly--her husband's "social superior." Sybil is, like her husband, a woman of some public influecnce, sitting on charity organizations and having been married two years ago to the Lord Mayor. She is an icily impressive woman, arguably the only one of all the Birlings to almost completely resist the Inspector's attempts to make her realize her responsibilities.
Eric Birling
Son of Arthur and Sybil Birling. Brother of Sheila Birling. Eric is in his "early twenties, not quite at ease, half shy, half assertive" and, we discover very early in the play, has a drinking problem. He has been drinking steadily for almost two years. He works at Birling and Company, and his father, we presume, is his boss. He is quite naive, in no way as worldly or as cunning as Gerald Croft. By the end of the play, like his sister, Eric becomes aware of his own responsiblities.
Inspector Goole
The Inspector "need not be a big man, but he creates at once an impression of massiveness, solidity and purposefulness." He is in his fifties, and he is dressed in a plain dark suit. Priestley describes him as speaking "carefully, weightily ... and [he] has a disconcerting habit of looking hard at the person he addresses before he speaks." He initially seems to be an ordinary Brumley police inspector, but (as his name might suggest) comes to seem something more ominous--perhaps even a supernatural being. The precise nature of his character is left ambiguous by Priestley, and it can be interpreted in various ways.
Edna
"The parlour maid." Her name is very similar to "Eva," and her presence onstage is a timely reminder of the presence of the lower classes, whom families like the Birlings unthinkingly keep in thrall.
Eva Smith
A girl who the Inspector claims worked for Birling and was fired, before working for Milwards and then being dismissed. She subsequently had relationships with Gerald Croft and then Eric Birling (by whom she became pregnant). Finally she turned to Mrs. Birling's charitable committeee for help, but she committed suicide two hours before the time of the beginning of the play; she drank strong disinfectant. It is possible, though, that the story is not quite true and that she never really existed as one person. Gerald Croft's suggestion that there was more than one girl involved in the Inspector's narrative could be more accurate.
Daisy Renton
A name that Eva Smith assumes.
Husband of Sybil, father of Sheila and Eric. Priestley describes him as a "heavy-looking man" in his mid-fifties, with easy manners but "rather provincial in his speech." He is the owner of Birling and Company, some sort of factory business which employs several girls to work on (presumably sewing) machines. He is a Magistrate and, two years ago, was Lord Mayor of Brumley. He thus is a man of some standing in the town. He describes himself as a "hard-headed practical man of business," and he is firmly capitalist, even right-wing, in his political views.
Gerald Croft
Engaged to be married to Sheila. His parents, Sir George and Lady Croft, are above the Birlings socially, and it seems his mother disapproves of his engagement to Sheila. He is, Priestley says, "an attractive chap about thirty ... very much the easy well-bred young-man-about-town." He works for his father's company, Crofts Limited, which seems to be both bigger and older than Birling and Company.
Sheila Birling
Engaged to be married to Gerald. Daughter of Arthur Birling and Sybil Birling, and sister of Eric. Priestley describes her as "a pretty girl in her early twenties, very pleased with life and rather excited," which is precisely how she comes across in the first act of the play. In the second and third acts, however, following the realization of the part she has played in Eva Smith's life, she matures and comes to realize the importance of the Inspector's message.
Sybil Birling
Married to Arthur. Mother of Sheila and Eric. Priestley has her "about fifty, a rather cold woman," and--significantly--her husband's "social superior." Sybil is, like her husband, a woman of some public influecnce, sitting on charity organizations and having been married two years ago to the Lord Mayor. She is an icily impressive woman, arguably the only one of all the Birlings to almost completely resist the Inspector's attempts to make her realize her responsibilities.
Son of Arthur and Sybil Birling. Brother of Sheila Birling. Eric is in his "early twenties, not quite at ease, half shy, half assertive" and, we discover very early in the play, has a drinking problem. He has been drinking steadily for almost two years. He works at Birling and Company, and his father, we presume, is his boss. He is quite naive, in no way as worldly or as cunning as Gerald Croft. By the end of the play, like his sister, Eric becomes aware of his own responsiblities.
Inspector Goole
The Inspector "need not be a big man, but he creates at once an impression of massiveness, solidity and purposefulness." He is in his fifties, and he is dressed in a plain dark suit. Priestley describes him as speaking "carefully, weightily ... and [he] has a disconcerting habit of looking hard at the person he addresses before he speaks." He initially seems to be an ordinary Brumley police inspector, but (as his name might suggest) comes to seem something more ominous--perhaps even a supernatural being. The precise nature of his character is left ambiguous by Priestley, and it can be interpreted in various ways.
Edna
"The parlour maid." Her name is very similar to "Eva," and her presence onstage is a timely reminder of the presence of the lower classes, whom families like the Birlings unthinkingly keep in thrall.
Eva Smith
A girl who the Inspector claims worked for Birling and was fired, before working for Milwards and then being dismissed. She subsequently had relationships with Gerald Croft and then Eric Birling (by whom she became pregnant). Finally she turned to Mrs. Birling's charitable committeee for help, but she committed suicide two hours before the time of the beginning of the play; she drank strong disinfectant. It is possible, though, that the story is not quite true and that she never really existed as one person. Gerald Croft's suggestion that there was more than one girl involved in the Inspector's narrative could be more accurate.
Daisy Renton
A name that Eva Smith assumes.
MAJOR THEMES IN AN INSPECTOR CALLS
Major Themes
ClassTaking the play from a socialist perspective inevitably focuses on issues of social class. Class is a large factor, indirectly, in the events of the play and Eva Smith’s death. Mrs. Birling, Priestley notes, is her husband’s social superior, just as Gerald will be Sheila’s social superior if they do get married. Priestley also subtly notes that Gerald’s mother, Lady Croft, disapproves of Gerald’s marrying Sheila for precisely this reason. Finally, everyone’s treatment of Eva might be put down (either in part or altogether) to the fact that she is a girl, as Mrs. Birling puts it, “of that class.” Priestley clearly was interested in the class system and how it determines the decisions that people make.
Youth and Age
The play implicitly draws out a significant contrast between the older and younger generations of Birlings. While Arthur and Sybil refuse to accept responsibility for their actions toward Eva Smith (Arthur, in particular, is only concerned for his reputation and his potential knighthood), Eric and especially Sheila are shaken by the Inspector’s message and their role in Eva Smith’s suicide. The younger generation is taking more responsibility, perhaps because they are more emotional and idealistic, but perhaps because Priestley is suggesting a more communally responsible socialist future for Britain.
Responsibility and Avoiding It
Though responsibility itself is a central theme of the play, the last act of the play provides a fascinating portrait of the way that people can let themselves off the hook. If one message of the play is that we must all care more thoroughly about the general welfare, it is clear that the message is not shared by all. By contrasting the older Birlings and Gerald with Sheila and Eric, Priestley explicitly draws out the difference between those who have accepted their responsibility and those who have not.
The Inspector outlines a “chain of events” that may well have led to Eva Smith’s death. Her suicide, seen in this way, is likely the product not of one person acting alone, but of a group of people each acting alone; it resulted from several causes. If Birling had not sacked Eva in the first place, Sheila could not have had her dismissed from Milwards, and Eric and Gerald would not have met her in the Palace bar. Had she never known Eric, she would never have needed to go to the charity commission. This series of events is closely associated with Priestley’s fascination with time and how things in time cause or are caused by others.
Time
Time, which deeply fascinated Priestley, is a central theme in many of his works. He famously was interested in Dunne’s theory of time, which argued that the past was still present, and that time was not linear as many traditional accounts suggest. An Inspector Calls explicitly deals with the nature of time in its final twist: has the play, we might wonder, simply gone back in time? Is it all about to happen again? How does the Inspector know of the “fire and blood and anguish,” usually interpreted as a foreshadowing of the First and Second World Wars?
The Supernatural
The Inspector’s name, though explicitly spelled “Goole” in the play, is often interpreted through an alternative spelling: “ghoul.” The Inspector, it seems, is not a “real” Brumley police inspector, and Priestley provides no answer as to whether we should believe his claim that he has nothing to do with Eva Smith. What are we to make of the police inspector who rings to announce his arrival at the end of the play? Is the original Inspector, perhaps, a ghost? What forces are at work in the play to make the Birlings really accept their responsibility and guilt?
Social Duty
“We do not live alone,” the Inspector says in his final speech, “we are members of one body.” This perhaps is the most important and central theme of the play: that we have a duty to other people, regardless of social status, wealth, class, or anything else. There is, Priestley observes, such a thing as society, and he argues that it is important that people be aware of the effects of their actions on others. The Birlings, of course, initially do not think at all about how they might have affected Eva Smith, but they are forced to confront their likely responsibility over the course of the play.
In Depth Act 3
Act 3a
There is a bitter meeting between Eric and his parents, which the Inspector interrupts so that he can question Eric. Eric tells the story of his own involvement with the girl. He had met her in the same theatre bar as Gerald, had got drunk and had accompanied her back to her lodgings. He almost turned violent when she didn't let him in, so she relented and they made love. When he met her two weeks later they slept together again and soon afterwards she discovered that she was pregnant. She did not want to marry Eric because she knew he didn't love her, but she did accept gifts of money from him until she realised it was stolen. Eric admits that he had taken about £50 from Mr Birling's office - at which Mr and Mrs Birling are furious.
All the Birlings now know they played a part in the girl's death. Mr and Mrs Birling are concerned about covering up their involvement, whereas Sheila and Eric are more aware of the personal tragedy and feel guilty. The Inspector leaves, after delivering a strong message about how we all should be responsible for each other
After he has left, and the family has begun to consider the consequences of what has been revealed, they gradually begin to wonder about the Inspector. Was he real? When Gerald returns from his walk he explains that he also had suspicions about the Inspector and had found out that there is no Inspector Goole on the force, which Birling confirms with a phone call.
They gradually realise that perhaps the Inspector conned them - he could have showed each person a different photograph - and when they telephone the infirmary, they realise that there hasn't been a suicide case for months. Birling is delighted, assuming they are now all off the hook, while Sheila and Eric maintain that nothing has changed - each of them still committed the acts that the Inspector had accused them of, even if they did turn out to be against five different girls.
Act 3b
Act 3c
They gradually realise that perhaps the Inspector conned them - he could have showed each person a different photograph - and when they telephone the infirmary, they realise that there hasn't been a suicide case for months. Birling is delighted, assuming they are now all off the hook, while Sheila and Eric maintain that nothing has changed - each of them still committed the acts that the Inspector had accused them of, even if they did turn out to be against five different girls.
Act 3d
Then the telephone rings. Mr Birling answers it, and after hanging up tells the family that it was the police on the line: an inspector is on his way to ask questions about the suicide of a young girl...In Depth Act 2
Act 2a
After some tense words between Sheila and Gerald, an attempt by Mrs Birling to usher the Inspector away and the revelation that Eric Birling is a hardened drinker, Gerald admits that he too had known Daisy Renton. He had met her at the local Variety Theatre - known to be the haunt of prostitutes - and had 'rescued' her from the unwelcome attentions of Alderman Meggarty, a local dignitary. When he found out that Daisy was almost penniless, Gerald let her stay in the flat of a friend of his and she became his mistress. He ended the affair when he had to go away on business, giving her some money to see her through for a few months.
Sheila is glad to have heard this confession from her fiancé, although Mrs Birling is scandalised. Once Gerald has left to go for a walk and get over the news of Daisy's death, Inspector Goole shows a photograph to Mrs Birling. She grudgingly admits that she had seen the girl two weeks previously, when the girl - now pregnant - had come to ask for financial assistance from the Brumley Women's Charity Organisation.
Mrs Birling was the chairwoman and persuaded the committee to turn down the girl's appeal on the grounds that she had the impudence to call herself Mrs Birling and because she believed that the father of the child should bear the responsibility. She says the girl refused to let the father of the child support her because she believed money he had given her previously to be stolen, yet Mrs Birling is proud of refusing the girl aid. She claims that she did her duty and sees no reason at all why she should take any blame for the girl's death.
Right at the end of the scene, as Mrs Birling denounces the father of the child and claims he needs to be made an example of, Sheila (and the audience) realise that Eric is involved. When Eric comes into the room, the act ends.
Act 2b
Mrs Birling was the chairwoman and persuaded the committee to turn down the girl's appeal on the grounds that she had the impudence to call herself Mrs Birling and because she believed that the father of the child should bear the responsibility. She says the girl refused to let the father of the child support her because she believed money he had given her previously to be stolen, yet Mrs Birling is proud of refusing the girl aid. She claims that she did her duty and sees no reason at all why she should take any blame for the girl's death.
Act 2c
If you want to STRETCH yourself....In Depth Act 1
Act 1a
The Birling family are holding a dinner party to celebrate the engagement of Sheila to Gerald Croft, the son and heir of Mr Birling's rival in business. Although there are a few signs that not everything is perfect (Mr Birling is a bit too anxious to impress Gerald, Eric seems rather nervous and Sheila playfully rebukes Gerald for not having come near her the previous summer) there is a happy, light-hearted atmosphere.
When the ladies leave the men to their port, Mr Birling has a 'man to man' chat with Gerald and Eric, advising them that a man needs to look after himself and his own family and not worry about the wider community. As he is telling them this, the door bell rings. Inspector Goole enters, an impressive, serious man whom none of them has heard of.
When the Inspector then states that Eva, in despair, changed her name to Daisy Renton, Gerald Croft's involuntary reaction reveals that he knew her too. When the act ends, the audience is poised to find out what part Gerald had to play in her death.
When the ladies leave the men to their port, Mr Birling has a 'man to man' chat with Gerald and Eric, advising them that a man needs to look after himself and his own family and not worry about the wider community. As he is telling them this, the door bell rings. Inspector Goole enters, an impressive, serious man whom none of them has heard of.
Act 1b
Inspector Goole announces that he has come to investigate the suicide of a young working-class girl who died that afternoon. Her name was Eva Smith. After seeing a photograph of her, Birling admits that she used to be one of his employees: he discharged her when she became one of the ring-leaders of a strike asking for slightly higher wages. Birling justifies sacking her by saying he paid his workers the usual rates; he cannot see that he has any responsibility for what happened to her afterwardsAct 1c
When Sheila enters, the Inspector reveals that he would also like to question her about Eva Smith's death. He tells Sheila that Eva's next job was at a big shop called Milwards, but that she was sacked after a customer complained about her. When she too is shown a photograph of the girl, Sheila is very affected. She admits that it was her fault that Eva was sacked: when Sheila had gone in to try on a dress that didn't suit her, she had caught Eva smirking to another shop assistant - in her anger, Sheila had told the manager that if Eva wasn't fired, Mrs Birling would close their account. Sheila is hugely guilty and feels responsible for Eva's death.When the Inspector then states that Eva, in despair, changed her name to Daisy Renton, Gerald Croft's involuntary reaction reveals that he knew her too. When the act ends, the audience is poised to find out what part Gerald had to play in her death.
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT - Finding your way around the text.
The first thing that you will need to do is to know your way around the play pretty well. You are going to be asked a question about the whole of the play. I think most of you will do well just talking about it based on what you know, but remember you need to write in PEE.
In order to write in PEE, you need quotes. And, for this, you need to be able to find the parts of the play that you need.
So, below is a brief summary of what happens in each Act:
Act 1:
*The celebration happens.
*Birling gives his speech about how great Britain is.
*The Inspector arrives at the house.
*The Inspector questions Arthur Birling about the sacking of Eva Smith.
*The Inspector speaks to Sheila about getting Eva Smith sacked from Milwards
*The Inspector starts to talk to Gerald Croft.
Act 2:
*The Inspector starts to question Gerald about his affair with Eva Smith/Daisy Renton.
*Gerald admits he had some feelings for her and is in shock.
*Gerald goes out for a walk.
*Sybil comes in and is very rude to the Inspector and tells him she has done nothing wrong.
*He questions Sybil about turning her Eva Smith/Daisy Renton away from the charity.
*She explains that she did it because the girl 'had the audacity to use the name 'Birling'.
*Sybil claims that it is Eva Smith's own responsibility AND the father of the baby.
Act 3:
*We learn that Eric is the baby's father.
*The Inspector questions Eric about meeting Eva, getting her pregnant
*We find out he has been stealing money from the family business to support her
*We find out that Eva Smith turned down the money once she knew it was stolen.
*The Inspector gives them one final lecture about treating people well, then he leaves.
*They all panic for a bit (particularly the older ones)
*The younger characters feel bad for their actions
*Gerald comes back and says he has discovered that the Inspector was a fake.
*The older characters celebrate and believe that they are now all 'off the hook'
*The phone rings. It is the REAL police wanting to speak to the Birlings about a REAL suicide (they didn't learn their lesson)
If nothing else, you should be memorising this so that you can find your way around the play!
NW
In order to write in PEE, you need quotes. And, for this, you need to be able to find the parts of the play that you need.
So, below is a brief summary of what happens in each Act:
Act 1:
*The celebration happens.
*Birling gives his speech about how great Britain is.
*The Inspector arrives at the house.
*The Inspector questions Arthur Birling about the sacking of Eva Smith.
*The Inspector speaks to Sheila about getting Eva Smith sacked from Milwards
*The Inspector starts to talk to Gerald Croft.
Act 2:
*The Inspector starts to question Gerald about his affair with Eva Smith/Daisy Renton.
*Gerald admits he had some feelings for her and is in shock.
*Gerald goes out for a walk.
*Sybil comes in and is very rude to the Inspector and tells him she has done nothing wrong.
*He questions Sybil about turning her Eva Smith/Daisy Renton away from the charity.
*She explains that she did it because the girl 'had the audacity to use the name 'Birling'.
*Sybil claims that it is Eva Smith's own responsibility AND the father of the baby.
Act 3:
*We learn that Eric is the baby's father.
*The Inspector questions Eric about meeting Eva, getting her pregnant
*We find out he has been stealing money from the family business to support her
*We find out that Eva Smith turned down the money once she knew it was stolen.
*The Inspector gives them one final lecture about treating people well, then he leaves.
*They all panic for a bit (particularly the older ones)
*The younger characters feel bad for their actions
*Gerald comes back and says he has discovered that the Inspector was a fake.
*The older characters celebrate and believe that they are now all 'off the hook'
*The phone rings. It is the REAL police wanting to speak to the Birlings about a REAL suicide (they didn't learn their lesson)
If nothing else, you should be memorising this so that you can find your way around the play!
NW
AN INSPECTORN CALLS - BACKGROUND TO 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.
This table describes what society was like in 1912 and in 1945
Responsibility
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
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
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
| |
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
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.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)