The Student Room Group

Inspector Calls Essay :)

Hi! its quite close to GCSE and I am kinda stressing.
Could someone mark/give me a few tips on how to improve this essay?

I am struggling a little bit to add relevant context, especially as I feel like each paragraph I am just saying the same thing about J.B Priestley, also could I get some advice on the conclusion and what to say because it feels quite weak right now thanks!!!
One last thing... Any tips to improve my timings, it takes me quite some time to think of ideas and I am worried I won't be able to complete it in the real thing. Appreciate all the help I can get :smile:


In an inspector calls Sheila drastically changes throughout the play; Initially she is presented as a naive and irresponsible character however as the play progresses she evolves her mature caricature becomes more prominent, perhaps even mimicking the Inspectors reasonable persona. J.B Priestley could have done this to reflect the ignorance within society during the Edwardian Era and therefore uses this as a method to promote socialism, where Sheila becomes more mature while Mr Birling’s stubborn capitalist attitudes hold him back.

In an inspector call, Sheila is initially presented as a naive and dependant person: relying on the attitudes of her parents to guide her own morality. Upon receiving the engagement ring, she seeks “Mummy” for approval, asking “Isn’t it a beauty”. Through the use of the childlike and youthful language it could perhaps be representative of the archetypal middle-class women at the time: shielded from “unpleasant businesses” of reality. This could be utilised as a juxtaposition to the brutality of Eva Smith/Daisy Renton’s life, although they are of same age and equally as “pretty”, their lives and the way they are treated are vastly different. Sheila is protected while Eva smith is abused and manipulated, “underserving” of any help. This also illustrates Sheila’s vulnerability as a woman, not having enough experience to voice her own opinion and therefore only able to “half seriously” question Gerald’s affair. J.B. Priestley could have done this to criticise the oppressive capitalist society, where its societal constructs only perpetuate the issues of gender: Sheila albeit a middle-class woman, is like Eva where both have no power.

However, as the play progresses, we see Sheila’s attitudes towards her own actions as having matured, claiming that “these girls aren’t cheap labour they are people”. The utilisation of the Imperative sentence could perhaps be representative of her own independence: contrasting Mr Birlings firm belief of fighting for “Lower costs and higher prices”. Furthermore, the use of the hyphen could encapsulate the reasonable and rational attitude of Sheila, symbolic of the pause where she stops and think about the consequences of her actions, illustrating the contrast between her character at the start of the play where her petty “envy” leads to her Eva Smith being sacked from Millwards. Priestley could have done this to typify the attitudes of the archetypal Edwardian middle class and therefore use them as a warning, portraying how Sheila would follow in her father’s naïve footsteps without the intervention of the Inspector and his Socialist views.

At the end of the play, Sheila’s attitudes have completely been subverted, claiming full responsibility of her actions and even going so far as to pass judgement on to other -Just like the inspector- claiming that “between us we drove that girl to commit suicide”. This could highlight the shared responsibility that she feels, illustrating the understanding and awareness of her surroundings: not only do “we” have to change but so does society. This contrasts her initial narrow perspective on the world, seeing it no longer through the viewpoint of a “pretty girl”, but instead a “woman”. Priestley utilises her as a mouthpiece to warn society of Capitalism, showing how Woman were restricted both by their parents and society as a whole, unable to vote. This allows for Socialism to be portrayed as the better viewpoint, as it broke down the conventional societal constructs holding society back.

In conclusion, Priestley has presented a drastic change that occurs to Sheila throughout the play, from a character who is naïve to one with a strong sense of morality and judgement. Where it could be seen as Priestley’s message, perhaps supporting Socialism as it empowers women, both in their opinions and their actions.
Reply 1
this is a really good essay
However, you should analyze the quote you embedded more.
You have good ideas, but you jump from one to another.
also since it takes time to think of ideas.
It's easier if u pick a character question, as its easier to prepare as u can write down like 3 to 4 quotes for each character, then explode one quote like every day, so u have a prepared paragraph for each character.
I would give this a high grade of 7 due to the reasons above. but keep going because this essay is really good and you have a future of getting an 8 or 9.
good luck
Alright I will try to do that in my next essay! Could you please advise me on how to prevent myself from jumping from one idea to another, should I explore words such as "Mummy" where the connotations could be of maternal protection, and this therefore illustrates the extent of Sheila's narrow perspective: unaware of society outside of her own class, and therefore the implications of her actions?
Thanks for taking the time to read it, I really appreciate it JF ZAK :smile:
Reply 3
Original post by full-size-hustle
Alright I will try to do that in my next essay! Could you please advise me on how to prevent myself from jumping from one idea to another, should I explore words such as "Mummy" where the connotations could be of maternal protection, and this therefore illustrates the extent of Sheila's narrow perspective: unaware of society outside of her own class, and therefore the implications of her actions?
Thanks for taking the time to read it, I really appreciate it JF ZAK :smile:

yes exactly
So you wrote about 'mummy''
You can talk about childishness and naivety, like you said.
but you can also think about:
The word 'Mummy' has an extremely childlike and young connotation, as it suggests that Sheila is of a very young age, as normally only small children call their parents Mummy and Daddy. It is also a stereotypically posh thing to say, reflecting Sheila's class and upbringing, showing that she is quite highly strung, and indicating that she values a high class of person. Alternitively, the word 'Mummy' can be seen to reflect how Sheila is ignoring the fact that she is growing up and shows her immaturity as a character. Her character almost makes herself seem younger on purpose because growing up is associated with having more responsibility and maybe taking responsibility and seeing the bigger picture, which was very much opposite to the capitalist society at the time. In contrast, after Preistley introduces the character of the Inspector and reveals how Sheila helped kill the girl, Sheila's character undergoes a transformation. The character of the Inspector forces Sheila to grow up, and she then begins to respond differently to her family, particularly Mrs. Birling. At the start of Act Two, Sheila begins to call Mrs. Birling 'Mother' rather than 'Mummy'. 'Mother, I couldn't possibly go'. The word 'Mother' in this quote shows how Sheila has changed because she addresses Mrs. Birling as another adult and not as if Sheila herself is a child. This shows how Sheila's character has changed, as it is evident of her growing up and becoming more mature, as it shows that she is no longer being as childlike as she was before. Preistley presents Sheila as a character who realizes she is responsible in the bigger picture and presents the character of Sheila as exploring socialist themes, much like the character of Inspector Goole.

I know this is a lot, but you can take the key ideas from it and then form your paragraph.
I hope it helps.
and no, i dont mind reading your essay, as i know what it feels like to know if essay is good or not
yooo your stuff is crazy good! I appreciate your help and hope you have a great day!
Is it alright if I could try to make a new essay using all your points and tips within the next week and send it to you for some more feedback? Its alright if you need to revise for gcse's and don't have the time :smile:
Reply 5
Original post by full-size-hustle
yooo your stuff is crazy good! I appreciate your help and hope you have a great day!
Is it alright if I could try to make a new essay using all your points and tips within the next week and send it to you for some more feedback? Its alright if you need to revise for gcse's and don't have the time :smile:

no its fine
thank you
im looking forward to read ur new essay
Reply 6
Hi fsh.

What you’ve got here is basically a very sound essay, with many excellent inferences.

Before I go into content, I would point out that you would benefit from proof-reading your work. Spend a few minutes at the end of writing it just to check it through. I know your teacher will have drilled this into you, but it’s really good advice. Control over expression and presentation automatically boosts you in an examiner’s eyes.

Some specific examples of what I mean : sentence structure needs a bit of attention. There are some occasions where a full stop is needed, to divide up the presentation of your thoughts.

Spellings need a run-through ‘caricature’, for example. Is that the word you mean or ‘character’? ‘Dependant’ or ‘dependent’?

You refer to an ‘Imperative’ (doesn’t need an initial capital) sentence. Is it imperative or declarative?

That said, you really do have some good ideas. You’ve clearly done some research into Priestley’s intentions as a playwright. To maximise this research, don’t just drop it in and walk away. Make more of it. For example : Sheila is representative of young women of the time, of her social class. Could you suggest that her parents have arguably let her down, in their over-protection of her? Her naivete isn’t entirely her fault. Her experience has been so limited by her upbringing that she genuinely can have no idea how others in society live. It isn’t until someone who represents that wider society confronts her with the harsh realities of life beyond the scope of her own experience that she must face some unpalatable truths. After all, as Priestley implies, ‘there but for the grace of God go I’.

Look at the other side of this argument, too. Do you think it’s possible that Sheila is at least peripherally aware of people like Eva Smith but until this point has chosen to dismiss them from her thoughts? It’s easier for her not to think of the Evas of the world. In doing that, she doesn’t need to feel guilty, doesn’t need to feel that she ought to do something to help them; essentially, pretending they aren’t there means they’re not there! Classic child-like behaviour. As you say, Sheila appears to still be very much a child, in some ways; ‘Mummy’ is a tell. (Or is that rather an indicator of class, than maturity?)

How has Sheila handled her upbringing in comparison with her brother? Why has Priestley chosen the female child to be the one who suggests things might change in the future?

Try to make more of how Sheila matures throughout the play. At the moment, your discussion of that is a little limited. Goole is the catalyst by which Sheila faces not only external harshness, but unpleasantness that affects her more directly and personally (her engagement to Gerald isn’t what she thought it was, for example). Maybe you could mention the relationship between her and Gerald. How has that happened, bearing in mind the way her parents have apparently cocooned her? It seems the link between a Birling and the Crofts is based rather more on commercial, than emotional, grounds. Has she never before questioned that arrangement herself?

Linked to that is possibly an embryonic realisation that unquestioning compliance with her parents' wishes may well now be a thing of the past. How will that work out for the whole family from now on?

I suppose what I'm saying here is that your essay rightly arrives at the conclusion that by 'Curtain Down' Sheila has changed, but it needs to be a little more convincing in how Sheila's realisations during the evening effect that change.

I don’t know what the actual question/title for this essay was, but I’m guessing it’s something to do with how Priestley develops Sheila as a character through ‘An Inspector Calls’. Perhaps you could trace that development a little more effectively. Yes, at the beginning she’s a bright and bubbly girl, excited and eager for the future. Or her narrow vision of her future, anyway. By the end of the play as you say she’s becoming more of a young woman, willing to take on the concept of responsibility. Would that have happened if Goole hadn’t paid a visit? If there’s doubt that the ‘Inspector’ was who he claimed to be, and that the uncomfortable evening the party has just spent can amount to nothing, do you think Sheila will revert to who she used to be? Or will ‘Goole’s’ influence remain?

Any questions ... get back to me. Hope this helps, anyway.
Thank you for the advice Wilf G and JF ZAK, It has truly helped me out a lot and I can't thank you enough :smile:

I have attempted to utilise each of your advice for creating my next writing by delving deeper into the analysis, and would really appreciate it if you would take a look at it.
I realise I struggle a lot with expanding my analysis and preventing it from being shallow and literal takes a lot of time which I think will cause me to not be able to write as much in the exam, could I have some advice on how to expand my analysis and tips on what to do if I am really stuck. Is there a sequential method I can use to guarantee good ideas? (this happened on the third paragraph which was why I ended it with "...")

Apologies for not posting the question before Wilf G. The one I used for the essay below is "How does Priestley explore responsibility in An Inspector Calls?"

In An Inspector Calls, Priestley explores the idea of responsibility through the reactions that the Birling family has to Eva Smith’s death: while some of the younger generations are illustrated as being remorseful and feeling “rotten”, other members of the family simply don’t care as it was not their “responsibility”. Priestley could have done this to bring awareness of the archetypal Edwardian attitudes towards the lower class, where the generational divide could perhaps be suggesting that there is salvation: only through socialism.

In An Inspector Calls, Priestley illustrates the middle-class responsibility (and therefore the lack of it) through Mr Birling’s perpetual “hard-headed” attitude, refusing to accept the consequences of his actions. At the start of the play, Mr Birling’s lengthy speech claims that “A man has to mind his own business”, where it could perhaps be representative of Mr Birling lack of regard towards the lower class, seeing them as nothing but “business”. Through the objectification of the lower class, it further typifies his irresponsibility, presenting his belief that those of the lower class are nothing but a means of “lowering prices”. Furthermore, this could perhaps be symbolic of Mr Birlings attitude towards life, where he views life as simply being a “business”, this illustrates Mr Birling attitude towards responsibility as avoidable, simply utilising his superiority to escape it. Not only does he decide to fire the “ring leaders” to avoid his “duty“ as a factory owner, but he also tries to bribe the Inspector, promising “thousands and thousands”. Priestley could have utilised the Inspector as a classless character, unable to be subjected to the restrictions of society and therefore allows for Mr Birling to finally accept his responsibility for his actions. However, Mr Birling’s attitude towards life could alternately be interpreted Priestley could have done this to criticise those of the middle class who abuse their power in their superficial drive for materialistic goods, only willing to give money once they were accountable for their actions.

Furthermore, In An Inspector Calls as the play approaches the end, it become apparent of lack of change within the middle-class attitude towards responsibility; Upon the revelation of the Inspector being nothing but a “hoax”, Mr Birling returns back to his own selfish ways, describing his relief as “We’ve been had, that’s all”. Through the use of the word “been”, the past tense could be representative of Mr Birlings dismissal of his wrongdoings, seeing it as simply being something in the past. Furthermore, this could further highlight his perception of the Inspector as being nothing more than a joke or a “hoax”, drawing a parallelism to a magic trick, which highlights Mr Birlings perceived insignificance of the lower class, being nothing more than a form of light entertainment or revelation. Priestley could have used the monosyllabic words to highlight a deeper issue within society, perhaps in an attempt to portray Mr Birlings shallow perception of his own wrongdoing as being instilled by society, forced upon him by the expectations of the upper class since his birth. Mr Birling unable to free himself from the restrictions of society, is simply just going to repeat his actions and therefore works as a criticism of Capitalism.

However, In An Inspector Calls, Priestley illustrates the changing attitude towards responsibility within the middle-class society through the younger generation. Sheila is initially presented as a naïve and dependant person who changes from a selfish and naïve character, evolving later into one who is willing to claim responsibility for her actions. After the Inspector leaves, Sheila claims that “between us we drove that girl to suicide”, this could have represented Sheila’s acknowledgement of her own wrongdoing, even going so far as to illustrate her acceptance of the consequences of those around her. Furthermore, through the constant repetition of the plural words “we” and “us” it could highlight the contrast between the younger generation and the older one, where instead of shifting the blame to others, Sheila instead fully accepts it….
In conclusion, Priestley has presented a drastic change the younger generation has had towards their attitude of responsibility, while the older generation is seen as static and stubborn in their attitudes. This highlights Priestley’s message of how Capitalism will keep society confined and perpetuated in agony as those of the middle class are unable to learn responsibility, yet Socialism will provide salvation as it will free the Edwardian society from their rigid attitudes towards responsibility.
Reply 8
Original post by full-size-hustle
Thank you for the advice Wilf G and JF ZAK, It has truly helped me out a lot and I can't thank you enough :smile:
I have attempted to utilise each of your advice for creating my next writing by delving deeper into the analysis, and would really appreciate it if you would take a look at it.
I realise I struggle a lot with expanding my analysis and preventing it from being shallow and literal takes a lot of time which I think will cause me to not be able to write as much in the exam, could I have some advice on how to expand my analysis and tips on what to do if I am really stuck. Is there a sequential method I can use to guarantee good ideas? (this happened on the third paragraph which was why I ended it with "...")
Apologies for not posting the question before Wilf G. The one I used for the essay below is "How does Priestley explore responsibility in An Inspector Calls?"
In An Inspector Calls, Priestley explores the idea of responsibility through the reactions that the Birling family has to Eva Smith’s death: while some of the younger generations are illustrated as being remorseful and feeling “rotten”, other members of the family simply don’t care as it was not their “responsibility”. Priestley could have done this to bring awareness of the archetypal Edwardian attitudes towards the lower class, where the generational divide could perhaps be suggesting that there is salvation: only through socialism.
In An Inspector Calls, Priestley illustrates the middle-class responsibility (and therefore the lack of it) through Mr Birling’s perpetual “hard-headed” attitude, refusing to accept the consequences of his actions. At the start of the play, Mr Birling’s lengthy speech claims that “A man has to mind his own business”, where it could perhaps be representative of Mr Birling lack of regard towards the lower class, seeing them as nothing but “business”. Through the objectification of the lower class, it further typifies his irresponsibility, presenting his belief that those of the lower class are nothing but a means of “lowering prices”. Furthermore, this could perhaps be symbolic of Mr Birlings attitude towards life, where he views life as simply being a “business”, this illustrates Mr Birling attitude towards responsibility as avoidable, simply utilising his superiority to escape it. Not only does he decide to fire the “ring leaders” to avoid his “duty“ as a factory owner, but he also tries to bribe the Inspector, promising “thousands and thousands”. Priestley could have utilised the Inspector as a classless character, unable to be subjected to the restrictions of society and therefore allows for Mr Birling to finally accept his responsibility for his actions. However, Mr Birling’s attitude towards life could alternately be interpreted Priestley could have done this to criticise those of the middle class who abuse their power in their superficial drive for materialistic goods, only willing to give money once they were accountable for their actions.
Furthermore, In An Inspector Calls as the play approaches the end, it become apparent of lack of change within the middle-class attitude towards responsibility; Upon the revelation of the Inspector being nothing but a “hoax”, Mr Birling returns back to his own selfish ways, describing his relief as “We’ve been had, that’s all”. Through the use of the word “been”, the past tense could be representative of Mr Birlings dismissal of his wrongdoings, seeing it as simply being something in the past. Furthermore, this could further highlight his perception of the Inspector as being nothing more than a joke or a “hoax”, drawing a parallelism to a magic trick, which highlights Mr Birlings perceived insignificance of the lower class, being nothing more than a form of light entertainment or revelation. Priestley could have used the monosyllabic words to highlight a deeper issue within society, perhaps in an attempt to portray Mr Birlings shallow perception of his own wrongdoing as being instilled by society, forced upon him by the expectations of the upper class since his birth. Mr Birling unable to free himself from the restrictions of society, is simply just going to repeat his actions and therefore works as a criticism of Capitalism.
However, In An Inspector Calls, Priestley illustrates the changing attitude towards responsibility within the middle-class society through the younger generation. Sheila is initially presented as a naïve and dependant person who changes from a selfish and naïve character, evolving later into one who is willing to claim responsibility for her actions. After the Inspector leaves, Sheila claims that “between us we drove that girl to suicide”, this could have represented Sheila’s acknowledgement of her own wrongdoing, even going so far as to illustrate her acceptance of the consequences of those around her. Furthermore, through the constant repetition of the plural words “we” and “us” it could highlight the contrast between the younger generation and the older one, where instead of shifting the blame to others, Sheila instead fully accepts it….
In conclusion, Priestley has presented a drastic change the younger generation has had towards their attitude of responsibility, while the older generation is seen as static and stubborn in their attitudes. This highlights Priestley’s message of how Capitalism will keep society confined and perpetuated in agony as those of the middle class are unable to learn responsibility, yet Socialism will provide salvation as it will free the Edwardian society from their rigid attitudes towards responsibility.

Hi again fsh.

This essay is more successful than your other one. Without a doubt.

SPaG issues firstly : paragraphing needs to be better. Think of what you’re saying as if you were making a documentary for TV. Each time the camera shifts focus slightly, you probably need a new paragraph. For example : your second paragraph deals with both Arthur Birling and Inspector Goole. Divide it up.

Work out the difference between 'dependent' and 'dependant', too.

You demonstrate more control over the points you want to make, and your use of textual evidence is strong with the exception of ‘thousands and thousands’. What does that mean? What are your inferences from that?

I like the way you highlight the fact that the old, traditional values are entrenched in the older generation. As you say, this is the ‘archetypal’ attitude. However, what stops it being perpetuated in the younger generation? What is Priestley saying here? If Sheila and Eric are a product of Arthur and Sybil Birling, and a restrictive upbringing, why do you think the young people might be different? What does Priestley perceive in youth that isn’t evident in age?

You could perhaps mention Gerald Croft, who seems to fall between the older and younger generation. What is his attitude to responsibility in terms of his treatment of Eva/Daisy? Which side of the fence would he be on, do you think?

Also in terms of responsibility, you could raise the notion of free will. Contentious though it may be, there is a belief that each one of us has the ability to make our own choices. How far do you think that might apply to Eva Smith? Did she have to make the choices she did? What would have been her alternatives or did she explore them first?

I’ll stop here for now. I know you said you wanted to think about how to write a good essay in the minutes you’re allowed in the exam, and I do have some thoughts about how to go about that. DM me if you have time.
Reply 9
Original post by full-size-hustle
Thank you for the advice Wilf G and JF ZAK, It has truly helped me out a lot and I can't thank you enough :smile:
I have attempted to utilise each of your advice for creating my next writing by delving deeper into the analysis, and would really appreciate it if you would take a look at it.
I realise I struggle a lot with expanding my analysis and preventing it from being shallow and literal takes a lot of time which I think will cause me to not be able to write as much in the exam, could I have some advice on how to expand my analysis and tips on what to do if I am really stuck. Is there a sequential method I can use to guarantee good ideas? (this happened on the third paragraph which was why I ended it with "...")
Apologies for not posting the question before Wilf G. The one I used for the essay below is "How does Priestley explore responsibility in An Inspector Calls?"
In An Inspector Calls, Priestley explores the idea of responsibility through the reactions that the Birling family has to Eva Smith’s death: while some of the younger generations are illustrated as being remorseful and feeling “rotten”, other members of the family simply don’t care as it was not their “responsibility”. Priestley could have done this to bring awareness of the archetypal Edwardian attitudes towards the lower class, where the generational divide could perhaps be suggesting that there is salvation: only through socialism.
In An Inspector Calls, Priestley illustrates the middle-class responsibility (and therefore the lack of it) through Mr Birling’s perpetual “hard-headed” attitude, refusing to accept the consequences of his actions. At the start of the play, Mr Birling’s lengthy speech claims that “A man has to mind his own business”, where it could perhaps be representative of Mr Birling lack of regard towards the lower class, seeing them as nothing but “business”. Through the objectification of the lower class, it further typifies his irresponsibility, presenting his belief that those of the lower class are nothing but a means of “lowering prices”. Furthermore, this could perhaps be symbolic of Mr Birlings attitude towards life, where he views life as simply being a “business”, this illustrates Mr Birling attitude towards responsibility as avoidable, simply utilising his superiority to escape it. Not only does he decide to fire the “ring leaders” to avoid his “duty“ as a factory owner, but he also tries to bribe the Inspector, promising “thousands and thousands”. Priestley could have utilised the Inspector as a classless character, unable to be subjected to the restrictions of society and therefore allows for Mr Birling to finally accept his responsibility for his actions. However, Mr Birling’s attitude towards life could alternately be interpreted Priestley could have done this to criticise those of the middle class who abuse their power in their superficial drive for materialistic goods, only willing to give money once they were accountable for their actions.
Furthermore, In An Inspector Calls as the play approaches the end, it become apparent of lack of change within the middle-class attitude towards responsibility; Upon the revelation of the Inspector being nothing but a “hoax”, Mr Birling returns back to his own selfish ways, describing his relief as “We’ve been had, that’s all”. Through the use of the word “been”, the past tense could be representative of Mr Birlings dismissal of his wrongdoings, seeing it as simply being something in the past. Furthermore, this could further highlight his perception of the Inspector as being nothing more than a joke or a “hoax”, drawing a parallelism to a magic trick, which highlights Mr Birlings perceived insignificance of the lower class, being nothing more than a form of light entertainment or revelation. Priestley could have used the monosyllabic words to highlight a deeper issue within society, perhaps in an attempt to portray Mr Birlings shallow perception of his own wrongdoing as being instilled by society, forced upon him by the expectations of the upper class since his birth. Mr Birling unable to free himself from the restrictions of society, is simply just going to repeat his actions and therefore works as a criticism of Capitalism.
However, In An Inspector Calls, Priestley illustrates the changing attitude towards responsibility within the middle-class society through the younger generation. Sheila is initially presented as a naïve and dependant person who changes from a selfish and naïve character, evolving later into one who is willing to claim responsibility for her actions. After the Inspector leaves, Sheila claims that “between us we drove that girl to suicide”, this could have represented Sheila’s acknowledgement of her own wrongdoing, even going so far as to illustrate her acceptance of the consequences of those around her. Furthermore, through the constant repetition of the plural words “we” and “us” it could highlight the contrast between the younger generation and the older one, where instead of shifting the blame to others, Sheila instead fully accepts it….
In conclusion, Priestley has presented a drastic change the younger generation has had towards their attitude of responsibility, while the older generation is seen as static and stubborn in their attitudes. This highlights Priestley’s message of how Capitalism will keep society confined and perpetuated in agony as those of the middle class are unable to learn responsibility, yet Socialism will provide salvation as it will free the Edwardian society from their rigid attitudes towards responsibility.

i love your essay
its good
for shelia:
u can expand on her acceptance of responsibility by repeating the inspectors words : "fire and and anguish."
Also, the change from her childish behaviour from "mummy" to "mother" shows that she is finally changing her attitudes from her egoistic ignorance to her maturity and social responsibility.
This is also another idea:
Priestley portrays Sheila as the perfect responder to her own wrongdoings, as she accepts responsibility for her actions immediately without deflecting blame onto others. The openness Sheila shows in accepting responsibility is evident, as “it was my own fault” and that she “was in a furious temper.”. Sheila, in contrast to the majority of other characters (save Eric), places no blame on Eva. She accepts that her own faults of jealousy caused her to envy Eva’s beauty and mistreat her. This reaction directly contrasts with Mrs. Birling, who adopts the view that "firstly, I blame the girl herself.”. Here, Priestley conveys that maturity doesn’t necessarily increase with age; in fact, the younger generation in Priestley’s play is the most mature. Here, Sheila has clearly developed from the character she was at the start of the play, who echoed her mother’s use of “impertinent” to describe Eva.
i recommend pmt as a good resource but when i get stuck in the exam, i look at the quote i provided, re read my thesis, then look at the paragraph i wrote on a blank sheet. i quickly write the bits i will zoom in on by what connection goes with the word or words.
for example:
"fire, blood and anguish"
'fire' highlights hell and the suffering with a burn from fire; this demonstrates the pain felt by the poor due to the actions of the aristocracy and middle-class businessmen... and so on
I hope this helps
if u just change the shiela paragraph and re send the essay with the improvements from me and @Wilf G
and I'll be able to give u the level at which the essay will fall in and individual feedback for each paragraph
I hope this helps

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending