In his 1945 polemic “An Inspector Calls”, socialist playwright J.B. Priestley uses the character
of the Inspector as a mouthpiece for his own socialist views and encourage social
responsibility. Through the power struggle between the older Birlings and the Inspector and
his effect on the younger generation, as well as his ambiguity as a character throughout the
play, Priestley portrays his socialist ideology as favourable to capitalism, encouraging his
1945 audience to consolidate the change they had already voted on for socialism after the
wars.
The Inspector is presented as a foil to Mr and Mrs Birlings, caricatures of the upper class
and, especially Mr Birling, personifications of capitalism. Before the Inspector enters the
household, we see Mr Birling dominating the conversation, claiming repeatedly he is a
“hard-headed man of business” and lecturing the younger generation on how “there isn’t a
chance of war”, which the 1945 audience know is a wrong, silly prediction. This is
immediately challenged by the entrance of the Inspector who does not allow Mr Birling’s
many attempts at boasting about his being “Lord Mayor two years ago” or his connection to
“the son of Sir George Croft” undermine him. His entrance, interrupting Mr Birling anti-
socialist statement, “a man has to mind his own business and look after himself’, is symbolic
of a counterargument against capitalism being provided. Despite the Inspector, as a
policeman of 1912, being considered lower class than families like the Birlings, he
interrogates the Birlings harshly, his challenging of the unquestioned authority of Mr Birling,
and hence, the capitalist narrative that had controlled Britain up to post-war, communicates
to the audience Priestley’s desire for a change in society towards socialism. He directly
confronts the Birling’s capitalist views, stating, “Public men, Mr Birling, have responsibilities
as well as privileges”, and criticises Mrs Birling, “I think you did something terribly wrong”.
The Inspector’s sense of social responsibility in holding the Birlings accountable contrasts
heavily to the Birlings who, even by the end of the play, deny any responsibility towards
Eva’s death, showing the superiority of the Inspector over the Birlings, therefore socialism
over capitalism. His accusing tone causes outbursts in the Birlings, who continuously,
unsuccessfully try to assert their dominance over the Inspector, which further paints them
as classist and condemnable, contrasting them to the Inspector. Through the challenging of
the Birlings by the Inspector, Priestley is challenging the convention of capitalism present in
1912; and further in creating disdain towards the Birlings in their clearly pompous
perspective, their stark contrast to the Inspector shines a favourable light on him, and
advertently, capitalism.
In contrast to the reaction of the older Birlings to the Inspector, Priestley shows the adverse
effect that he has on the younger generation of the Birlings. Using Eva to inflict guilt on the
family, the Inspector evokes empathy from Sheila towards her, becoming “rather
distressed” after hearing of Eva’s suicide. Priestley demonstrates the instantaneous effect
the Inspector’s message has on Sheila, as she rebukes her father, saying “these girls aren’t
cheap labour – they’re people” Sheila is symbolic of the Inspector’s ability to change
people’s mindset, and acts as the ideal exemplar to the audience, showing how Priestley
wants them to react to the Inspector’s message, to recognise the destruction caused by
capitalism towards 1912 society. The Inspector inspires a sense of social responsibility
within Sheila, who, by the end of the play, has realised the immorality of her family’s