An Inspector Calls

Act 2

linguistic style geek -Julia

rhetorical question

p.31 l.32: "Well, we know one young woman who wasn't, don't we?

-> Inspector wants to find out the whole truth / would like to find out more

p. 37 ll.24-25: "...so why on earth don't you leave us to it?"

-> Gerlald wants Sheila to go

p.43 l.41: "Apologise for what - doing my duty?

-> Inspector makes Mrs Birling appear ridicolous

sarcasm/irony/satire

p.31 l.19: "Probably."

-> Sheila wants to express mockery towards Gerald and/or the Inspector

p. 33 ll.16-18: "and while we'll be glad ... help you much"

-> Mrs Birling means the opposite

p.34 ll.28-29: "Probably it's ... a silly word"

p.37 ll.20-21: "Well, we didn't ... Buckingham Palace"

p.37 ll.42-43: "I'm supposed ... hero of it"

p.40 ll.42-43: "You were the wonderful Fairy Prince"

-> Sheila wants to express mockery towards Mrs Birling/Gerald/Inspector

anaphora

p.32 l.29: "I know, I know. -> Sheila desn't want to her more of it

p.42 ll.10-11: "...to be alone, to be quiet, to remember..."

-> to emphasize and to dramatize

climax

p.32 ll.35-36: "... the rest of tonight, all tomorrow, all the next night"

-> the Inspector wants to convince Gerald

hyperbole

p.38 l.15: "And probably between us we killed her."

-> to emphasize and to dramatize

metaphor

p.34 ll.15-16: "You mustn't try ... and that girl"

p.35 ll.42-43: "I talked about ... be knocked flat"

-> as a picturing and to clarify

p.40 ll.34-35: "Your daughter isn't living on the moon"

-> to convince Birling from the opposite

understatement

p.35 l.20: "He's only a boy"

-> Mrs Birling tries to defend her son

p.40 ll.29-30: "I only did ... might have done"

-> Birling tries to defend hisself

oxymoron

p.41 l.6: "I wasn't telling you a complete lie"

-> gloss over

allusion

p.36 ll.34-35: "No, he's giving us rope - so that we'll hang ourselves."

-> Sheila wants to stop her mother

Literary Genius Act 1 Emil Schneider

The first half of the first act mainly serves to introduce the characters. The titular inspector hasn't yet arrived and the evening conversation is dominated by Arthur, a man who seemingly likes to hear himself talk and is very sure of himself.Priestley uses this great amount of dialogue from Arthur to set him up as somebody for the audience to antagonize. His political views are radically opposed to Priestley and his bold statements about the war and the Titanic, which the audience would know to be false make him seem rather naive.His reaction to Eva Smiths death is as cold as you would expect, contrary to Sheila's, who is rather distressed when she hears about it.Likewise, Arthur, when hearing about the his involvement in Eva's death, shrugs it off as mere coincidence, whereas Sheila even starts crying.At the end of act 1 Sheila claims that the inspector knows more than he is telling, foreshadowing the fact that he seems to already know the answers to all the questions he asks.

Edna:Edna is the housemaid of the Birling family. She doesn't have a lot of 'screen time' indicating that she is less important to the story in Act 1 than the the other characters. Her duties include answering the front door in case of a visitor such as the Inspector. The family wishes her to leave the room during private conversations and Edna takes these orders without talking back which makes her appear to be loyal towards the Birling family.

Eric:Eric Birling is the son of Arthur and Sybil Birling. He has a sister called Sheila. His views on the world seem to be different than his fathers who says that Eric has a lot to learn. Eric is having small arguments with his sister and has a sassy attitude strenghening his fathers view of him not being mature yet. He calls the death of Eva Smith "a damn shame" and doesn't seem to know her although he is clearly shook when he found out about her suicide, showing that he is a caring person even if he comes off as rude from time to time.

Inspector:The Inspector is a man in his fifties and unknown to the family members because he just started working as an Inspector in the city indicating that he moved there. He is described as a man whose sole presence transfers a vibe of seriousness and purpose to the entire room. He works very systematically questioning each family member after anotherand doesn't let anyone interfere with his system. Inspector Goole is a figure of authority and doesn't hold back from interrupting the person he's questioning if the conversation derives from the direction he wants to head to. The other characters seem to be respect him based on how they behave while talking to him. It seems like the Inspector knows every answer to the questions he's asking and only asks to get a confirmation by the members of the family which makes him appear superior to the others.

Characterization

1. Arthur Birling is described as an “heavy looking, rather portentous man in his middle fifties with fairly easy manners but rather provincial in his speech“. He is married with Sybil Birling and has two adult kids named Eric and Sheila. He is the boss from his own manufacturing company and it seems that he like his son-in-law especially to strengthen his position. He seas himself as an “hard-headed businessman” and he often gives some homespun philosophies to others (also in connection with his work). He seems to be very manipulative to others, especially towards Gerald, when he told him that he has an accolade in view. Mr. Birling also gets angry very fast, for example when he talked to the inspector.

2. Sybill Birling is described from the author as “ a rather cold woman” “about fifty”. She is married with Arthur Birling and has two adult kids named Eric and Sheila. She seems to be very calm but also very happy about her daughter´s wedding plans. She has a clear opinion and push these as Arthur´s “social superior” through.

3. Inspector Goole is a “man in his fifties” and creates just when he arrives an “impression of massiveness, solidity and purposefulness”. He wears a “plain darkish suit of the period” and “speaks carefully, weightily” with an “disconcerting habit of looking hard at the person he addresses” before he actually start speaking. He is very mysterious and often drops hints when he talks to (or interrogates) an “suspect”.

The second scene starts of with a similar setting as Act 1 with the Inspector continuing to ask the family questions about the death of Eva Smith whilst continuing to be as calm and collected as throughout his appearance in his first Act. The transition from the first Act is smooth and doesn't have an abrupt ending, the general atmosphere therefore stays the same with the only major difference being the increased level of distress in characters such as Eric, Sheila and Gerald. The characters, especially and most importantly Eric and Sheila start to not fully trust each other and seem to change views of the other person with additional information about Eva Smith/ Daisy being revealed. Sybil entering adds a new character to interact with the Inspector, she doesn't seem to be pleased with his presence and labels his questions "impertinent". Gerald is uncomfortable with the reveal of his affair with Eva/ Daisy to his in-laws and tries to hide it at first but accepts that the lesser evil would be confessing as he realized that Sheila is accepting of his misbehaviour and would rather hear the truth instead of lies. Gerald didn't want to hurt anyone, his interaction with Eva/ Daisy is based of him wanting to help her indicating that Geralds true character remains to be rather kind even if he did wrong to another person while helping another one. Arthur is less concerned about the affair but more so of that affair being revealed to the public which would greatly harm their image which Mr. Birling cares about a lot. Nonetheless both Mr. and Mrs. Birling are upset about the unfaithfulness of Gerald but try to reason it out by indicating having affairs is common among men. During the conversations the Inspector still has the upperhand due to his general choice of speaking being witty and calm in that manner. Interestingly he often recycles the phrases that people said in order to keep the conversation the way he wants, the only time he broke his calm approach is when he got annoyed by Mrs. Birling, however it remains unclear whether or not that tiny outbreak was a planned move to get the conversation back on track or if it really was him breaking his so far established character. The story advances quicker in the second act since the first act was more of a build up to exhibit the different characters and their behavior in a more casual environment. The plot twist at the end provokes a sudden rise in tension as per usual in the end of the second act in a three act play making the reader want to read/see the following act.

Lisa

Setting

At the biginning of act two the setting is the same as it was at the end of act one. Place: the play still takes place in the dining-room Time: approximately one hour Mood: tension due to Gerald and Sheilas fight seems to lighten on page 33 when the mother comes in (line 6 to 10) “smiling, social“ line 11 “same easy tone“ line 14 builds up again until the end of the act Sheila tries interrupts her mother and tries to warn her “It‘s crazy. Stop it, please mother“ page 5 line 9 “Mother – stop – stop!° page 50 line 8 Mrs Birling says something she is going to regrett “Secondly I blame the young man who was the father...“

Settings-Act2

ThesecondacttakesplaceinthediningroomfromfamilyBrilinginBrumley.Inthebeginningisthemoodalittledepressing,becauseSheilawantedtostay,soshedidn’thavetostandthewholesituationonherown.LaterintimeSheilaandhermotherhadanargument,whichleadstoatenseatmosphere.AfterGeraldtoldtheinspectorthathehadanloveaffairwithEvaSmithSheilagiveshimtheringback,whichiskindofsad,becausetheyloveeachother.

ByAminaPanz

Linguistic Style Geek Act 2 Emil Schneider

Changes in the Inspector's Style and Tone of speechThroughout all of his dialogue in act 1 the Inspector talks in a rather calm manner, while maintaining a slightly witty Style which, together with his assertiveness, allows him to keep the upper hand during the questioning.This Style of language makes a return in act 2, were he often uses other people's words against them to keep the conversation in check and dismiss their attempts at distraction.

“ Birling: And I don't propose to give you much rope.Inspector: You needn't give me any rope.” (p.36; l.31-33)“ Inspector: Yes. I think you'd better look at it.Mrs Birling: I don't see any particular reason why I should-Inspector: Probably not. But you'd better look at it.” (p.43; l.21-24)

After questioning Mrs Birling for a while his calm and collected demeanour shows some cracks and he loses his cool for a bit.

“Inspector: Don't stammer and yammer at me again, man. I'm losing all patience with you people. What did she say?” (p.48; l.30-32)It is unclear however if the Inspector actually lost his composure or if even this apparent outbreak was calculated, since it succeeds in bringing the back on track and he seems to immediately fall back into his calm, collected manner of speech afterwards.

Advocatus DiabolicaThe Inspector acts as a Devil's Advocate towards the end of the act in his questioning of Sybil. He pretends to support her argument and thus tricks her to place all the blame on the man who impregnated Eva Smith, which he knows to be Eric.

J.B. Priestley uses Sheilla to show the influence the inspector and his knowledge has, she seems terrified by the things he knows and tries to convince the others to stop resisting, because it is useless. In contrast to that Mrs. Birling shows the same attitude to the inspector as her husband did trying to use her power as a known person in town and to stop his questioning, she doesn't believe what Sheilla is saying and acts confidently that she is right towards the inspector not accepting any responsibility for what she has done, which inevitably leads her in a trap where she talks about punishing the boy who impregnated the girl, at which point the audience realizes it must be Eric. The author uses this to highlight the arrogance and overconfidence rich people have, thinking they could achieve everything with their influence. Also this highlights her false character, because she would have never talked so bad about her own son, but has no problem talking like that about other people, also at this point the inspector uses irony to kind od make fun of her knowing that she is talking about her son, but still agreeing with her that the boy must be punished(p.49-50). At the end Erics entrance is perfectly timed when everyone realized that he is the person who impregnated the girl to leave the audience interested what will happen next in act 3. Alos the author uses short sentences of combined adjectives to describe people for example `` hard-eyed dough-faced’’ (p.38 l.7) or `` half-drunk and goggle-eyed’’ (p.38 l.22). Also if any person starts saying something against the job the inspector is doing, he uses their formulations against them to stop them talking about the wrong things and to push the conversations forward for example ``You needn’t give me any rope`` (p.36 l.33) or ``Don’t worry, Mrs. Birling. I shall do my duty``(p.50 l. 19-20).

Characterisation of the Inspector (Act two) As we have already noticed before, the Inspector is a very impressive person. He doesn´t talk that much and he doesn´t need to. When he talks, than he asks a lot of questions, like a professional Inspector would do. That creates a certain serious atmosphere whenever he utters something, leading back to his impressive attitude. In general we don´t get a lot of information about him because he never gets personal or talks about himself (e.g. p. 33 ll. 4), so you can conclude that he is probably not an amenable person. He is the one who let the plot go on, indirectly meaning that he is not a supporter of small talk and comes straight to the point (e.g. p. 32, l.22). He confronts people directly and doesn´t pretend that everything is good the way it is now (e.g. p. 32 l.31). On page 33 l. 13 he responds politely to Mrs. Birling “good evening madam” even though she is obviously not happy with the Inspector´s presence, so he is indirectly characterised as a very calm person who doesn´t get provoke that easy (another example: p. 33 ll. 34). The following situation shows us -again indirectly- that the Inspector stands to his opinion (e.g. p. 34 ll. 21). As the plot continues the Inspector even talks less and just asks questions again (e.g. p. 39) so we don´t get any further information about him, but the way Gerald answers to his question shows that he respects him, probably caused by his impressive attitude. Act two gives us a little more information about the Inspector and his character, he is indirectly characterised as a direct, honest person who doesn´t like to talk about himself or at least doesn´t want to do that on duty. Characterisation of Gerald In Act one we get to know Gerald as Sheilas fiance and as a son of a businessman who comes after his father. The last lines let the reader think that he has something to do with the girl´s death. He likes to talk for his fiance (e.g. p. 30 ll.10), which indirectly hints at the former, classical role allocation where the man is stronger and has to protect “his” woman. Even though he is a very young men in his early twenties, he does not want to change, but as the reader knows, back then the ellumination had already started so he or she gets the impression as if Gerald is kind of retarded. As the plot continuous, he mentions that Sheila shouldn´t listen to what might come up when he speaks with the Inspector. That can be seen as a sign of love so that either he wants to protect her from getting to know the truth and getting hurt by that or that she might be disappointed by what he did to that young dead girl. That indirect characterisation shows that he cares about her and whatever reason it is that he doesn´t want her to know he obviously loves her. The Inspector starts questioning him and Gerald answers directly which leads to the assumption that he is an honest person. In the middle of the story where he explained how he know the woman he starts stammering so the reader can conclude that he might be more sensible than he pretends to be. Also it is clear that he cared about Eva Smith a lot, and as he confesses later he had an affair with her while he was with Sheila. Characterisation of Eric

Eric is not mentioned in Act two.

Caracterization – Act 2, Annika Stellmacher

Arthur Birling

As in act 1 Arthur is very buisness focused (p.40, ll.29) and is only worried about their public standing and not about what had happend to Eva Smith (p.48, ll.5). Furthermore he can`t accept that

the inspector is in control of the situation (p.36, ll.29; p.45, ll.29).

Sybil Birling

Sybil Birling is a prominent member of the Brumley Women`s Charity Organisation (p.44, ll.29). She is very selfconfident (p.33, l.11) and according to Sheila she is imprudent and says things without thinking about it (p.33, l.24). Furthermore she doesn`t recognize how serious the investigation is (p.33, l.39). In addition to that she`s indirect caracterised as arrogant because she thinks she is better than the inspector (p.34, ll.21) and she tries to daunt him by saying him how

powerfull they are in town (p.35, ll.1). Sybil could be indirect caracterised as ignorant and wanting to have a ´perfect` family because she still treat Eric and Sheila as young children (p.35, ll.20) and she is turning a blind eye to her son Eric drinking too much (p.35, ll.20). In the beginning she ignores the inspector (p.44, l.32) thinking she could resist his questions. But in the end she couldn`t

and so she tells him everything he wants (p.46, ll.20). As Arthur she feels no responsibility for the death of Eva Smith (p.46, ll.41; p.49, ll.28) and she

looks down on her by saying ´a girl of that sort` (p.49, l.2) which supports that she thinks she is better than the people of the ´lower class`.Sybil Birling represents the feminine capitalist of the old generation.

Inspector Goole

The inspector is indirect caracterised as dominant and authoritarian (p.32, l.22; p.36, ll.21; p.37,

l.31). He accuses Gerald and Sheila of killing Eva Smith (p.31, ll.32). But he also could put hisself

in the position of somebody else because he understands why Sheila wants to stay (p.32, ll.22). Sheila caracterises him indirect as mysterious and intransparent (p.33, ll.2). He is never impolite buthe makes the Birlings feel unconfident through asking them questions (p.33, ll.29). Throughout the act he gets annoyed of the Birlings and loses his patience with them because his tone becomes harder (p.38, l.4, l.14; p.48, ll.31) and he interrupts them by asking them questions because he

doesn`t want to waste time (p.35, l.19). That`s the only caracter development of the inspector.In addition to that he turns the Birlings against each other (p.35, ll.19) and he brings out the totaly different social opinions of the Birlings. The role of the inspector is to make the Birlings question their own behavior and morality and he drives forward the drama with his questions.

Characterization Act II

Sybil BirlingSybil Birling is described as really confident and sure of herself which is written in the stage directions making it a direct characterization but she is also indirectly characterized as confident by what she's saying, for example in the beginning of act two where she's having a conversation with her daughter sheila and Mrs Birling is convinced that she knows whats going on better than Sheila.She knows how to get her way, you could almost say she's bossy in line 6 on page 34.

Sheila BirlingSheila Birling appears to be nervous at the beginning of act two, which can be read in the stage instructions. Indirectly characterized, she seems to be really smart and attentive and she always wants to know what is going on (line 26-30, page 37).At first, Sheila appears to be quite confident as well but on page 32 you can read that this isn’t completely true as she takes things her fiancé said personal really quickly because she doesn't let him finish his sentence because she might be afraid of what he is going to say.

Arthur BirlingArthur Birling enters the act rather late because he was trying to get his son to go to bed which already indirectly characterizes him as a caring person,the stage instructions confirm this character trait.He appears to be a really round and honest character with no bad motives whatsoever as he shows all kind of emotions and empathy.