Assess the dramatic effect of Eva Smith in relation to two of the characters in An Inspector Calls Essays

Assess the dramatic effect of Eva Smith in relation to two of the characters in An Inspector Calls Essays Assess the dramatic effect of Eva Smith in relation to two of the characters in An Inspector Calls Essay Assess the dramatic effect of Eva Smith in relation to two of the characters in An Inspector Calls Essay Essay Topic: Literature We are halfway through Act Three of An Inspector Calls by J. B. Priestley. The Inspector has, just as eerily and spookily as he arrived, exited the home of the Birling family. His provocation of the revelations that have been forced out by all members of the family including Sheilas husband-to-be Gerald, has left them bewildered and as very different people to the happy family group they were a few hours previously. In this play, the Inspector has very prominently acted as the representative for Eva Smith, who has apparently died tragically this night. We are given a few details about this girl she was country-born and was blessed with soft brown hair and dark brown eyes and a pretty appearance. Taking into account the fact that Eva is a young woman to whom we have never spoken and who does not physically enter this play at all she is but a diary, a photograph and a story how exactly has she managed to affect these five lives so colossally? I will focus on the reactions of and the effect upon Arthur and Sheila Birling father and daughter. It appears that, ironically, the Birling family has once again been split. At the beginning of the play, the audience remembers the men together in the drawing room, sharing drinks and talking of success. Mr. Birling, father of Eric and Sheila, is obviously a businessman with a very capitalist nature and way of thinking, given his mission statement working together for lower costs and higher prices as he lectures Gerald and Eric. Maybe this personality flaw is what has caused him to continue being stubborn and disbelieving towards Inspector Goole, now that he has gone. What does Mr. Birling care that Eva has died, and that, as pointed out by the Inspector, neither he nor his wife, son, daughter or her fiance an ever even say Im sorry, Eva Smith? It seems Arthur Birlings pompous and selfish attitude is stronger than his feelings of guilt. Even before Mr. Birling realises that the unfair and unjustified, abrupt dismissal of Eva from Birling Company two years ago, following her request for a rise and the ensuing workers strike, contributed to her death, he says, its a perfectly straightforward case, and as it happened more than eighteen months ago obviously it has nothing to do with the wretched girls suicide! The use of the word wretched is very damning and disrespectful of Eva, especially considering Mr. Birlings own input into her death. Of his refusal to grant Eva the couple of shillings more that she requested, he says, if you dont come down sharply on some of these people, theyd soon be asking for the Earth! He does not realise how much of the Earth he himself has actually taken, until the Inspector wittily replies, after all its better to ask for the Earth than to take it. It appears that Inspector Goole has managed to stir up some feelings of panic in Mr. Birling though as youd imagine they are not related to Evas tragic death or his involvement in it. He is, in fact, worrying again about his social standing and prestige. He has discovered that, to keep Eva and the child they were expecting before she died, Arthurs son, Eric, had been stealing money from Birling Company to give to her. Mr. Birling knows that as soon as Eva realised the money she was being given was stolen, she refused to take any more. He still, however, hurriedly insists that Eric give him a record of those accounts so that he can cover thi s up as soon as possible. Mr. Birlings driving concern is his own self-interest. Theyll be a public scandal, he says tactlessly. Here we note how hes prepared to pay out thousands to keep the scandal quiet. Mr. Birling is more concerned with the embarrassment he would face if it was to arise that Eric had stolen some of the companys money, rather than his own sons deceit and his reasons for taking the money in the first place. After all, any revelations about Birling Co. would surely hinder Arthur Birlings chance of being knighted. If we keep track of Birlings behaviour ever since the point of the Inspectors exit, we notice his relief at the point when the family begins to question the identity of the Inspector. When it becomes apparent that Gerald has actually established that Inspector Goole is not a registered member of the force, Mr. Birling cheers up considerably! Obviously the reason for this is his comfort in thinking there might still be a chance of knighthood for him. Surely the majority of his family would simply be relieved that the untoward parts they played in the life of a young woman were not cumulative and there has in fact been no actual death? Mrs. Birling certainly takes this view, apparently forgetting that the family members did do what they did, and says of her children, In the morning theyll be as amused as we are. However, Sheila Birling, Arthurs daughter, is considerably more affected by the revelations than her father. For Eva, whether or not she exists or did exist, has proved to be a poignant learning curve for Sheila in relation to her temper and the way she acts in relation to others. Sheila, of course, was a regular customer at the department store called Milwards when Eva was enjoying a fairly steady, well-paid job there. Sheila was being adamant and very stubborn towards her mother and insisted that she try on a dress shed seen. Sheila had been in a furious temper that day anyway, and we realise later that it was because her partner Gerald had been having an affair (or so she suspected). Sheilas mother and the sales assistant, Miss Francis, had both advised Sheila that to try the dress on would be a mistake, but she had insisted. After having tried the dress on, Sheila knew immediately that the two had been right all along, and that the dress did not flatter her at all. Sheila described how this girl [Eva] had brought the dress up from the workroom, and when the assistant Miss Francis had asked her something about it, to show us what she meant, she had helped the dress up, as if she was wearing it. Sheila said it just suited her and that she was jealous of her figure and her dark eyes. Then, when Sheila was looking at herself in the dress, she caught sight of Eva smiling at Miss Francis. Becoming furious and taking the smile the wrong way, Sheila promptly demanded to see the manager and insisted that, unless they fired Eva, she would boycott the store forever. Sheila used her power as the daughter of a respected customer to make life difficult and miserable for Eva. This, we are told by the Inspector, was Evas final steady job she was never employed again. From Act One of the play, we could see that something was very wrong in the relationship between Sheila and her father, simply because of their difference in personality. When her father egotistically states his capitalist views and opinions on the working world and society in general, Sheila is at the forefront of protest. She says, but these girls arent cheap labour theyre people! I think that, from Sheilas siding with Eric following the departure of the Inspector and her reluctance to believe that the whole affair was simply a hoax, she has learnt more from the story (and definitely the possible reality) of Eva Smith and her plight, that any other member of her family. I suppose were all nice people now, says Sheila sarcastically. She means, of course, to mock the attitude of her family and her fianci in realisation of their involvement with Eva Smith and her death. Much to her dismay, disbelief and disappointment, they cling onto their last shreds of dignity in a way that only self-centred narcissistic people do (Was he really a police Inspector? How do we know any girl killed herself today? ) and attempting to erase the previous few hours. Mr. Birling even offers the men a drink! Sheila, however, is adamant that she will prove her point that each one of them still has a great deal to be sorry for. Sheila is just as uncertain as any of the other family members as to whether or not Eva existed as one girl or as five but the mysterious figure of Eva has affected her deeply. It doesnt alter the fact that we all helped to kill her, she says. In my opinion, Sheila is right! Inspector Goole acts very much as the voice of J. B. Priestley and of Eva Smith; especially during his final speech when he told the family, there are millions and millions and millions of Eva Smiths and John Smiths still left with us all intertwined with our lives we dont live alone. Mr Birling needs to have taken note of the Inspectors lesson, in which he warned people of being taught in fire and blood and anguish if they did not begin to realise how their apparently trivial or self-righteous actions have significant effects on others around them. Despite Sheilas pleas and analytical attitude towards the Inspectors speech and his presence, Mr. Birling and his wife typically endeavour to pass her words off as childish misunderstanding: Really, from the way you children [Eric and Sheila] talk, you might be wanting to help him instead of us! However, is the reality of that statement so ridiculous? I certainly feel that the intentions of the Inspector and Eva Smith, whoever they were, were to remind them to help each other and to help others in society, however far beneath them in terms of social hierarchy they are considered to be. Eva, whether real or imaginary (and the feeling of her existence is certainly very strong), is a very touching archetype of societys in difference, maybe even hatred, of others around them. This applies most fully to people of supposedly high social status people like Arthur Birling and his family who live in large houses and drink expensive port. Mr. Birling does not see that the Inspector has proved his society and all that nonsense theory to be absolutely incorrect. At the very end of Act Three, the telephone to the Birling household rings, and it is spookily confirmed that a girl has in fact died at the Infirmary that very night. Priestley describes the shock of the family members as they stare, guiltily. This is effective because every one of them is, in one way or another, guilty. The telephone call really seems to confirm the fact that the selfishness of each member of the Birling family and Gerald Croft, although maybe not quite so heavily in his case, has contributed to the death of a young woman. This brings the audience to the (intensely dramatic) end of the play, and we cannot help but wonder how the lives of the family will fare following this incident and the series of incidents during their recent years. We have been led to believe that Eva and her fate has brought about the possibility of Sheila and Eric changing their attitudes and the ways in which they react to members of society around them. Sheilas involvement with Eva Smiths death was the result of her very strong temper and the fact that she misused her high status to induce problems in the life of another. Eva Smith and her story will hopefully have caused her to rethink her actions and their possible consequences. Her brother Erics life had become intertwined with Evas when he was intoxicated at the Palace Variety Bar, and picked her up. Eric is a character whose life seems to have become very difficult and complicated it may have taken someone like Eva to make him change his ways and think about his disregard for everything rational and caring. The audience hopes, however, that the person upon whom Eva Smith has had the most dramatic effect is Arthur Birling. It is rather saddening to watch the family having had such an experience, almost a blessing, with a prophet such as Inspector Goole and his interrogation. This is because he has taught Arthur, Sybil, Sheila, Eric and Gerald a very valuable lesson, which half of the family has apparently taken no note of whatsoever. It is apparent that Eva Smith, Daisy Renton or whoever it was coming into contact with the Birling family over the said period of time may not exist, but this has not stopped her from having an extremely consequential effect on five people. Priestley has, fully intentionally of course, left us wondering if the Birlings will think about their effect upon people around them or whether they will have to be taught their lesson of concern for those of lower social standing in fire, blood and anguish.

Visual Arts Movements from 30,000 BC-400 AD

Visual Arts Movements from 30,000 BC-400 AD Prehistory Paleolithic (Old Stone Age) Art  - 30,000-10,000 B.C.Mesolithic (Middle Stone Age) Art  - 10,000-8000 B.C.Neolithic (New Stone Age) Art  - 8000-3000 B.C.Bronze Age Art - 2500-800 B.C.Iron Age Art - 750-50 B.C. Ancient Civilizations Mesopotamia Sumerian Art - 3000-2300 B.C.Akkadian Art - 2300-2150 B.C.Neo-Sumerian Art - 2150-2000 B.C.Babylonian Art - 1900-1600 B.C.Assyrian Art - 900-612 B.C.Neo-Babylonian Art - 625-539 B.C. Egypt Early Dynastic Art - 3500-2686 B.C.Old Kingdom Art - 2686-2185 B.C.Middle Kingdom Art - 2133-1750 B.C.Early New Kingdom Art - 1570-1353 B.C.Amarna Art - 1353-1332 B.C.Late New Kingdom Art - 1332-1075 B.C.Late Period Art - 750-332 B.C.Macedonian Dynasty Art - 332-304 B.C.Ptolemaic Dynasty Art - 304-30 B.C. The Cycladic Islands/Crete Early Minoan Art - 2800-2000 B.C.Middle Minoan Art - 2000-1700 B.C.Late Minoan Art - 1550-1400 B.C. Phoenician Art - 1500-500 B.C. Nomadic Tribes Luristan Art - 700-500 B.C.Scythian Art - 600-300 B.C. Persian Empire Art - 539-331 B.C. Classical Civilizations Greek Art Mycenaean Art - 1550-1200 B.C.Sub-Mycenaean Art - 1100-1025 B.C.Proto-Geometric Art - 1025-900 B.C.Geometric Art - 900-700 B.C.Archaic Art - 700-480 B.C.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Orientalizing Phase - 735-650 B.C.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Early Archaic - 700-600 B.C.  Ã‚  Ã‚  High Archaic - 600-520 B.C.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Late Archaic - 520-480 B.C.Classical Art - 480-323 B.C.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Early Classical - 480-450 B.C.  Ã‚  Ã‚  High Classical - 450-400 B.C.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Late Classical - 400-323 B.C.Hellenistic Art - 323-31 B.C.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Early Hellenistic - 323-250 B.C.  Ã‚  Ã‚  High Hellenistic - 250-100 B.C.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Late Hellenistic - 100 -31 B.C. Etruscan Art Early Iron Age Art - 9th century-ca. 675 B.C.Orientalizing Phase - ca. 675-ca. 575 B.C.Archaic Period Art - ca. 575-ca. 480 B.C.Classical Period Art - ca. 480-ca. 300 B.C.Hellenistic Period Art - ca. 300-ca. 50 B.C. Roman Art Republican Art - 510-27 B.C.Early Roman Empire Art - 27 B.C.-235 A.D.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Augustan - 27 B.C.-14 A.D.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Julio-Claudian - 14-68  Ã‚  Ã‚  Flavian - 69-96  Ã‚  Ã‚  Trajanic - 98-117  Ã‚  Ã‚  Hadrianic - 117-138  Ã‚  Ã‚  Antonine - 138-192  Ã‚  Ã‚  Severin - 193-235Late Roman Empire/Late Antique Art - 235-476 Judean Art - 600 B.C.-135 A.D. Celtic Art Early Style - ca. 450-ca. 350 B.C.Waldalgesheim Style - ca. 350-ca. 250 B.C.Sword and Plastic Styles - ca. 250-ca. 125 B.C.Oppida Period Art - ca. 125-ca. 50 B.C.Britain and Ireland before 600 A.D. Parthian and Sassanidic Art - 238 B.C.-637 A.D. Non-Western Ancient Art China Neolithic – ca. 6,000–ca. 1,600 B.C.Shang Dynasty – 1,766–1,045 B.C.Zhou Dynasty – 1,045–256 B.C.Qin Dynasty – 221–206 B.C.Han Dynasty – 206 B.C.–220 A.D.Three Kingdoms Period – 220–280Western Jin Dynasty – 265–316Six Dynasties Period – 222–589Northern and Southern Dynasties Period – 310–589 Japan Jomon – 4,500–200 B.C.Yayoi – 200 B.C.–200 A.D.Kofun – 200–500 Indian Subcontinent Indus Valley – 4,000–1,800 B.C.Sarasvati-Sindhu Civilization - 3,000–1,500 B.C.Aryan India - 1,500–500 B.C.The Mauryan Empire - 321–233 B.C.Gandhara and Kushan School – 1st–3rd centuries A.D.The Gupta Dynasty - 320–510 Africa Rock Art in Southern AfricaSahara - Bubalus Period – ca. 6,000–ca. 3,500 B.C.Lower Nubia – ca. 3,500–2,000 B.C.Kush – 2,000 B.C.–325 A.D.Pre-dynastic Kemet – to 3,050 B.C.The Nok Culture - 400 B.C.–200 A.D.Aksum - 350 B.C.–1,000 A.D. North America Mexico   Ã‚  Ã‚  Olmec Art - 1,200–350 B.C.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Zapotec Art – 1,400 B.C.–400 A.D.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Huastec Art - ca. 1000 B.C.-1521 A.D.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Mayan Art - 300 B.C.–800 A.D. South America Valdivian Art - ca. 4,000-ca. 1,500 B.C.Chavin Art - ca. 2,600-ca. 200 B.C.San Agustin - ca. 800 B.C.-ca. 1630 A.D.Moche and Nasca Art - ca. 200 B.C.-ca. 600 A.D.