EXAM  BOOKLET  Exploring  modern  texts    

ENGLISH  LITERATURE  GCSE  –  unit  1:  20 May 2013 AM

AN  INSPECTOR  CALLS

EXAMPLE  ANSWERS

IMPORTANT  INFORMATION There  will  be  a  choice  of  two  questions  on  An  Inspector  Calls  (questions  17  and  18  on  the  exam  paper). You  have  45  minutes  to  answer  one  of  these  questions. Your  answer  will  be  assessed  for  AO1  (interpretation)  and  AO2  (analysis). According  to  the  mark-­‐scheme,  a  top  band  response  will  show:-­‐ -­‐an  insightful  understanding  of  the  task  and  the  text Does  your  answer  actually  answer  the  exam  question? -­‐close  analysis  of  detail  to  support  opinions Have  you  based  your  answer  on  specific  examples  from  the  text? -­‐analysis  of  the  writer’s  use  of  language  and  its  effect  on  the  audience Have  you  written  in  PEE  paragraphs?  Do  you  use  literary  terms? Do  you  comment  on  Priestley’s  intentions? Do  you  comment  on  the  effect  on  the  audience? -­‐a  convincing  interpretation  of  the  ideas  and  themes  in  the  play Do  you  understand  how  the  examples  you’ve  used  fit  in  with  the  bigger  themes  and  issues  in  the  play? Exam  questions  will  assess  your  knowledge  of  characters  or  their  relationships,  themes  and  issues  in  the  text  or  will  ask  you  to  focus  on  a  particular  moment  and  comment  on  how  it  fits  with  the  rest  of  the  play. Read  the  student  answers  below  and,  using  the  mark-­‐scheme,  work  out  what  their  strengths  and  weaknesses  are.  How  could  they  be  improved? Question  17 How  does  Priestley  show  that  tension  is  at  the  heart  of  the  Birling  family?  (30  marks) Question  18 Priestley  criticises  the  selfishness  of  people  like  the  Birlings.  What  methods  does  he  use  to  present  this  selfishness?  (30  marks)

MARK-SCHEME Band  6 Candidates  demonstrate: 26-­‐30  marks 6.1  Insightful  exploratory  response  to  task

6.2  Insightful  exploratory  response  to  text 6.3  Close  analysis  of  detail  to  support  interpretation 6.4  Evaluation  of  the  writer’s  uses  of  language  and/or  structure  and/or  form  and  effects  on readers/audience 6.5  Convincing/imaginative  interpretation  of  ideas/themes

Information  is  presented  clearly  and  accurately.  Writing  is  fluent  and  focused.  Syntax  and  spelling

are  used  with  a  high  degree  of  accuracy. Mark  Band  5 Candidates  demonstrate: 21-­‐25  marks 5.1  Exploratory  response  to  task

5.2  Exploratory  response  to  text 5.3  Analytical  use  of  details  to  support  interpretation

5.4  Analysis  of  writer’s  uses  of  language  and/or  structure  and/or  form  and  effects  on  readers/audience

5.5  Exploration  of  ideas/themes

Structure  and  style  are  used  effectively  to  render  meaning  clear.  Syntax  and  spelling  are  used  with  a

high  degree  of  accuracy. Mark  Band  4 Candidates  demonstrate: 16-­‐20  marks 4.1  Considered/qualified  response  to  task

4.2  Considered/qualified  response  to  text 4.3  Details  linked  to  interpretation

4.4  Appreciation/consideration  of  writer’s  uses  of  language  and/or  form  and/or  structure  and  effect

on  readers/audience 4.5  Thoughtful  consideration  of  ideas/themes

Information  is  presented  in  a  way  which  assists  with  communication  of  meaning.  Syntax  and  spelling

are  generally  accurate. Mark  Band  3 Candidates  demonstrate: 11-­‐15  marks 3.1  Sustained  response  to  task

3.2  Sustained  response  to  text 3.3  Effective  use  of  details  to  support  interpretation

3.4  Explanation  of  effects  of  writer’s  uses  of  language  and/or  form  and/or  structure  and  effects  on

readers/audience 3.5  Appropriate  comment  on  ideas/themes

Information  is  usually  presented  in  a  way  which  assists  with  communication  of  meaning.  Syntax  and

spelling  are  generally  accurate. Mark  Band  2 Candidates  demonstrate: 6-­‐10  marks 2.1  Explained  response  to  task

2.2  Explained  response  to  text 2.3  Details  used  to  support  a  range  of  comments 2.4  Identification  of  effect(s)  of  writer’s  choices  of  language  and/or  form  and/or  structure 2.5  Awareness  of  ideas/themes

Information  is  presented  in  a  way  which  is  generally  clear.  Syntax  and  spelling  have  some  degree  of

accuracy. Mark  Band  1 Candidates  demonstrate: 1-­‐5  marks 1.1  Supported  response  to  task

1.2  Supported  response  to  text 1.3  Comment(s)  on  detail(s) 1.4  Awareness  of  writer  making  choice(s)  of  language  and/or  structure  and/or  form 1.5  Generalisations  about  ideas/themes

Despite  lapses,  information  is  presented  in  a  way  which  is  usually  clear.  Syntax  and  spelling  have some  degree  of  accuracy,  although  there  are  likely  to  be  frequent  errors 0  marks Nothing  worthy  of  credit

STUDENT  A 17. In  the  play  „An  Inspector  Calls‟,  there  is  tension  at  the  heart  of  the  Birling  family.  Priestley  

shows  this  when  the  Inspector  mentions  the  Eva  Smith  was  fired.  Sheila  instantly  remembered  her  and  stutters  her  words  “what  –  what  did  this  girl  look  like?”,  and  again  when  the  inspector  shows  Sheila  the  picture  of  Eva  Smith.  “She  looks  at  it  closely,  recognizes  it  with  a  little  cry,  gives  a  half-­‐stifled  sob,  and  then  runs  out.”  This  would  suggest  that  Sheila  does  remember  and  thinks  that  it  is  her  fault  Eva  ids  dead.  This  would  make  the  readers  suspicious  and  wonder  if  it  was  Sheila.    

 Priestley  also  shows  tension  when  Sheila  wants  to  know  how  Gerald  knows  Eva/Daisy.  “Oh  don‟t  be  stupid.  We  haven‟t  much  time.  You  gave  yourself  away  as  soon  as  he  mentioned  her  other  name.”  The  tension  carries  on  in  act  two  with  Gerald  and  Sheila.  “You‟ve  been  through  it  –  and  now  you  want  to  see  somebody  else  put  through  it.”  “So  that‟s  what  you  think  I‟m  really  like.  I‟m  glad  I  realised  it  in  time,  Gerald.”    

 Priestley  also  uses  the  Inspector  to  show  tension.  He‟s  done  this  by  making  the  Inspector  have  the  power  to  make  people  talk.  The  way  he  does  this  is  by  talking  to  them  one  at  a  time  so  he  only  needs  to  break  down  one  person  easier.  He  has  the  power  to  make  them  do  what  he  wants.      “(taking  charge,  masterfully)  Stop!  They  are  suddenly  quiet  staring  at  him.”    

 In  conclusion  Priestley  has  shown  tension  in  the  book  very  well.  I  think  what  he  is  trying  to  show  is  how  easy  a  happy  family  can  change  all  because  of  one  person.    

MARK:  14/30  (Band  3)

Priestley  sets  the  play  in  the  dining  room  of  the  Birlings‟  house  in  Brumley.  We  are  straight  away  

introduced  to  the  characters  through  a  family  dinner,  celebrating  the  engagement  of  Sheila  Birling  and Gerald  Croft.  We  instantly  get  a  strong  sense  of  Mr  Birlings‟  charactor,  as  we  can  see  he  talks  a  lot,  and  has  strong  views.  Priestley  wants  us  to  notice  Birlings‟  nieve  manner,  giving  us  a  bad  impression  of  him.  Temsion  is  formed  from  the  start,  when  Birling  talks  about  the  unlikelihood  of  war:  „-­‐  fiddlesticks!  The  Germans  don‟t  want  war.  Nobody  wants  war.‟  He  also  talks  about  strikes  and  the  „unsinkable  Titanic,‟  and  as  ,  an  audience  we  understand  that  all  these  horrible  things  did  actually  happen.  This  gives  us  a  dislike  towards  his  character,  as  we  can  see  that  he  isn‟t  an  open  minded  character. Throughout  the  celebration,  Priestly  wrote  that  „the  lighting  should  be  pink  and  intimate.‟  I  think  he  wanted  it  to  be  pink  to  show  a  subtle,  calm  atmosphere,  as  they  all  start  off  having  a  good  time.  It  could  also  be  showing,  „looking  through  rose  tinted  glasses,‟  saying  that  everything  seems  better  than  it  is.  Suddenly  when  the  inspector  arrives,  the  light  changes  from  a  soft  pink  to  a  hard  white,  as  he  wanst  to  show  that  these  characters  can  not  hide  anymore,  and  all  their  secrets  will  be  revealed. Preistley  also  demonstrates  the  tension  in  the  family  by  leaving  us  in  suspence,  wondering  what  the  outcomes  are.  He  uses  this  technique  a  lot,  throughout  the  play,  e.g.  The  end  of  act  1,  when  Sheila  works  out  that  Gerald  had  been  seeing  Eva/Daisy  of  over  the  summer. The  way  Priestley  uses  Exits  and  Entrances  also  creates  tension.  At  the  end  of  Act  II,  Mrs  Birling  realizes  that  Eric  had  been  involved  with  Eva/Daisy‟s  death  and  getting  her  pregnant.  We  understand  that  their  had  been  a  lot  of  secrets  in  the  family  and  not  very  good  communication  skills. The  end  of  the  book  is  the  most  tense  part  of  the  book.  This  is  where  Gerald  works  out  that  I  was  all  a  prank  and  joins  sides  with  the  older  generation.  This  could  have  something  to  do  with  him  being  upper  class,  and  as  he  has  more  to  lose,  he  has  more  to  hide.  The  big  twist  is  where  Priestley  wants  us  to  understand  that  we  have  to  take  responsibility  for  out  actions,  and  think  before  we  speak. MARK:  15/30  (Band  3) STUDENT  C 18. In  An  Inspector  Calls,  Priestley  has  created  a  family  like  The  Birlings  who  are  middle/upper  class  

represent  the  selfishness  of  people  like  the  Birlings  in  1912.  He  uses  them  as  a  vehicle  to  get  across  the  moral  message  that  we  are  all  apart  of  a  community.  He  also  has  incorporated  the  innocent  character  of  Eva  Smith  to  make  them  realize  just  how  selfish  they  are  and  he  uses  the  inspector  to  emote  a  sense  of  guilt.    

 At  the  beginning  of  Act  One,  Priestley  has  opened  with  the  lie,  “Giving  us  the  port,  Edna?”  which  straight  away  shows  Mr  Birling  as  a  upper  middle  class  man  who  has  enough  money  to  afford  a  parlour  maid.  It  also  gives  the  reader  the  idea  that  Birling  doesn‟t  care  for  the  working  class,  like  Edna,  and  doesn‟t  even  bother  to  say  please  or  thank  you.  The  minor,  but  very  symbolic  character  of  Edna  is  one  of  the  characters  Priestley  has  used  to  make  the  reader  see  just  how  selfish  the  Birlings  are.  Furthermore,  it  makes  the  audience  feel  sorry  for  Edna  and  shows  the  family  for  who  they  are.    

 After   Birling   has  made   a   speech   about   “a  man   has   to  …   look   after   himself   and   his   own”   the   Inspector  ringing  on  the  doorbell  interrupts  him.  This  is  a  use  of  dramatic  irony  that  Priestley  has  cleverly  slotted  in  to  make,      Mr  Birling  especially,  seem  unkind  and  selfish.  As  we  know,  the  whole  purpose  of  the  Inspector‟s  visit  is  to  highlight  that  we  all  are  responsible  for  each  other  and  what  the  Birlings  have  been  doing  is  wrong  and  that  they  must  change.  Priestley  uses  dramatic  irony  throughout  the  play,  like  Birling  saying  “the  Titanic  …  is  unsinkable,  absolutely  unsinkable,”  when  the  audience  knows  that  in  fact  it  did  sink.    

 As  the  Inspector  starts  to  interrogate  the  characters  about  Eva  Smith‟s  suicide  the  audience  should  

start  to  get  to  know  the  family  a  little  better,  When  Mr  Birling  is  showed  a  picture  of  the  girl  he  immediately  recognizes  her  as  a  girl  he‟d  sacked  from  his  factory  for  asking  for  a  higher  wage  “They  wanted  the  rates  raised  so  that  they  could  average  about  twenty-­‐five  shillings  a  week.  I  refused,  of  course.”  Mr  Birling‟s  attitude  towards  his  workers  shows  just  how  greedy  he  is  and  gives  us  an  insight  into  what  his  view  of  the  world  is.  Priestley  has  definately  made  the  characters  seem  like  they  think  they‟re  doing  no  wrong  which  makes  them  seem  even  more  selfish.    

 As  the  play  progresses,  we  see  Sheila  and  Mrs  Birling  both  get  questioned  by  Inspector  Goole.  Priestley  made  Sheila  seem  like  a  spolt  girl  when  she  sacked  Eva  from  Milwards  just  for  “smiling  at  the  assistant”  and  Sheila‟s  dress  that  she  wanted  “suited  her.”  This  shows  Sheila  in  a  negative  light  and  makes  her  seem  irresponsible  and  not  aware  of  the  lower  class.  However,  Sheila  is  able  to  learn  from  the  Inspectors  visit.      Priestley  uses  her  to  show  that  the  old  can‟t  learn  and  only  the  young,  like  Sheila  and  Eric  can  see  their  mistakes.  It  highlights  the  generation  divide  and  how  much  more  selfish  people  use  to  be.    

 Towards  the  end,  the  Inspector  makes  his  final  speech  about  us  everyone  being  “members  of  one  body”  and  “we  are  responsible  for  each  other.”  This  is  meant  to  make  the  Birlings  feel  guilty  nd  change  their  traditional  views.  Priestley  used  the  inspector‟s  brash  and  straight  to  the  point  attitude  as  a  method  to  present  their  selfishness.    

 In  conclusion,  I  feel  Priestley  wrote  this  play  to  show  just  how  selfish  families  like  the  Birlings  were  in  1912  and  get  across  the  moral  message.  I  feel  he  used  the  Inspector  and  his  questioning  to  show  just  how  self-­‐centred  they  were  being.  I  think  he  also  used  working  class  characters  like  Edna  and  Eva  to  emote  a  feeling  of  sadness  towards  them.  He  also  used  dramatic  irony  to  show  just  how  one  sided  they  saw  the  world.    

MARK:  20/30  (Band  4)

STUDENT  D 18.  J.B.  Priestley,  who  wrote  the  play  „An  Inspector  Calls,‟  criticizes  the  selfishness  of  people  like  the  Birlings  very  well.  In  each  character  he  shows  their  real  views  immediately.  At  the  beginning  of  the  book  in  Act  One  he  gives  a  description  of  each  of  the  characters  in  the  play,  he  describes  Mr  Birling  as  „rather  portentous‟  and  „provincial  in  his  speech.‟  This  shows  Mr  Birling  is  quite  thorough  in  the  way  he  speaks  and  delivers  the  message  clearly  and  later  in  the  play  it  becomes  apparent  that  his  views  are  selfish  and  unsympathetic. The  first  example  of  Mr  Birling‟s  speeches  being  selfish  is  in  act  one  where  Mr  Birling  is  speaking  about  Sheila  and  Gerald‟s  engagement.  Mr  Birling  begins  by  saying  „It‟s  one  of  the  happiest  night‟s  of  my  life,‟  which  already  shows  he  selfishness  as  Mr  Birling  should  be  talking  about  his  daughter‟s  happiness  not  his  own.  He  then  continues  to  say  „you‟re  just  the  kind  of  son-­‐in-­‐law  I‟ve  always  wanted,‟  this  shows  a  complete  lack  of  respect  for  Eric  who  is  his  natural  son  who  would  be  feeling  jealousy  at  this  point  which  creates  tension  in  the  scene. Mr  Birling  finally  finishes  by  saying  “your  father  and  I  have  been  friendly  rivals  in  business  for  some  time  now  …and  perhaps  we  may  look  forward  to  the  time  where  cRofts  Ltd  and  Birlings  and  co  can  work  together.”  This  quote  represents  the  real  reason  why  Mr  Birling  is  happy  because  Gerald  comes  from  a  socially  superior  family  to  Birling  and  therefore  sees  this  as  an  opportunity  to  climb  the  social  ladder  into  a  higher  state  of  authority,  he  also  sees  this  as  a  money  making  opportunity  because  Gerald‟s  father  has  a  bigger  company  than  Birling  and  sees  this  engagement  as  an  opportunity  to  „lower  costs  and  higher  prices.‟  He  shows  a  complete  self  centred  side  to  this  engagement. Further  on  in  Act  One  the  Inspector  arrives.  At  the  beginning  before  Act  One  Priestley  comments  on  how  the  lighting  should  change  as  soon  as  the  inspector  enters  from  being  „pink  and  intimate‟  to  „brighter  and  harder,‟  immediately  you  get  the  sense  from  the  lighting  that  this  is  important  as  the  inspector  is  Priestley‟s  way  of  exposing  the  Birlings‟  true  colours.  The  first  way  in  which  he  does  this  is  by  questioning  each  character  at  a  time  as  he  quotes  “one  line  of  inquiry  at  a  time.”  The  inspector  shows  that  by  questioning  one  person  at  a  time  he  can  direct  his  full  inquisition  in  one  place.  This  is  shown  with  Mr  Birling  when  he  shows  a  photograph  to  him  of  Eva  but  no-­‐one  else.  This  strategy  is  combined  with  the  Inspector‟s  almost  impossible  knowledge  as  he  seems  to  know  a  lot  about  the  girl,  this  is  shown  when  the  Inspector  says  „This  young  woman,  Eva  Smith,  was  a  bit  out  of  the  ordinary‟  this  creates  mystery  because  how  can  the  Inspector  know  that  if  he  hasn‟t  met  her? Eventually  Mr  Birling  confesses  to  sacking  Eva  because  she  wanted  a  higher  wage  but  the  real  reason  was  because  „it‟s  my  duty  to  keep  labour  costs  down,‟  this  shows  the  complete  money  motivated  Mr  Birling  like  in  the  first  speech  and  shows  Mr  Birling  sees  workers  like  Eva  Smith  as  cheap  labour  and  doesn‟t  think  that  without  these  workers  his  company  would  be  nowhere. The  Inspector  continues  to  use  the  same  strategy  with  Sheila  and  the  other  characters  in  the  play.  The  inspector  is  very  influential  on  Sheila  which  is  first  shown  in  Act  One,  Sheila  says  „these  girls  aren‟t  cheap  labour,  they‟re  people‟  in  which  the  insoector  completely  agrees  with.  Sheila  also  is  the  quickest  and  most  remorseful  to  confess  her  part  in  the  suicide  of  Eva  Smith,  she  almost  seems  to  form  an  alliance  with  the  inspector  to  eplore  the  selfishness  of  the  old,  none  more  so  than  Mrs  Birling. Mrs  Birling  shows  the  least  amount  of  respect  to  the  inspector  as  she  tries  to  cover  up  her  part  in  the  story  which  is  first  seen  in  Act  two,  “I  meant  what  I  said”  as  a  reply  to  the  Inspector  inquiring  about  Eva  in  a  photograph.  She  continues  to  try  and  cover  her  part  up  in  which  Sheila  says  “you‟re  making  it  worse,”  this  shows  Sheila‟s  alliance  with  the  Inspector  in  trying  to  get  a  confession.  In  the  end  Mrs  Birling  confesses  to  being  prejudiced  against  Eva‟s  case  to  her  charity  for  help  and  accepted  no  part  in  the  responsibility  in  Eva‟s  death,  a  fact  that  the  inspector  delivers  in  his  final  speech  says  “that  the  time  will  come  soon,  that  if  men  will  not  learn  that  lesson,  he  will  be  taught  it  in  fire,  blood  and  anguish.‟  This  final  speech  completely  represents  Priestley‟s  views  of  everyone  being  part  of  one  society  and  foreshadows  that  if  the  older  generation  such  as  Mr  and  Mrs  Birling  can‟t  accept  responsibility  for  their  actions  they  will  be  taught  it  by  war  and  because  the  book  is  set  before  WWI  and  performed  after  WWII,  the  message  is  aimed  at  everyone  to  live  as  one  society  including  the  audience  of  the  play  to  learn  this  lesson.  This  is  very  effective  as  before  WWI  the  upper  and  lower  classes  were  hugely  divided  but  after  WWII  they  were  much  closer  and  so  Priestley  is  trying  to  keep  the  attitude  after  WWII  the  same  whilst  showing  the  side  before  WWI  as  being  the  wrong  way. MARK:  25/30  (Band  5)  

BBC BITESIZE SUMMARY AND SYNOPSIS:    J B Priestley wrote An Inspector Calls after the First World War and like much of his work contains controversial, politically charged messages.

J B Priestley

J B Priestley 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 to work as a freelance writer. He wrote successful articles and essays, then published the first of many novels, The Good Companions, in 1929. He wrote his first play in 1932 and went on to write 50 more. Much of his writing was ground-breaking and controversial. He included new ideas about possible parallel universes and strong political messages. 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.

Political views

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 would set an example to the world by a moral act of nuclear disarmament. 1912 to 1945

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 Calls is 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 Europe on 8 May 1945. People were recovering from nearly six years of warfare, danger and uncertainty.

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. PLOT: The Birling family are spending a happy evening celebrating the engagement of Sheila Birling to Gerald

Croft - a marriage that will result in the merging of two successful local businesses. Yet, just when everything seems to be going so well, they receive a surprise visit from an Inspector Goole who is investigating the suicide of a young girl.

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.

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 afterwards.

Act 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.

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.

Act 2b

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.

Act 2c

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.

Act 3b

Act 3c

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 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... Explore the interactive timeline for An Inspector Calls The characters we see as the curtain rises are not the same as those at the plays conclusion. Inspector Goole is instrumental in disturbing the harmony; a purposeful, mysterious character who forces the characters to confront each other's social responsibility, snobbery and guilt. But who is Inspector Goole? And who is the girl whose suicide he is apparently investigating?

Mr Arthur Birling

He is described at the start as a “heavy-looking, rather

portentous man in his middle fifties but rather provincial in his speech."

He has worked his way up in the world and is proud of his achievements. He boasts about having been Mayor and tries (and fails) to impress the Inspector with his local standing and his influential friends.

However, he is aware of people who are his social superiors, which is why he shows off about the port to Gerald, "it's exactly the same port your father gets." He is proud that he is likely to be knighted, as that would move him even higher in social circles.

He claims the party “is one of the happiest nights of my life.” This is not only because Sheila will be happy, but because a merger with Crofts Limited will be good for his business.

He is optimistic for the future and confident that there will not be a war. As the audience knows there will be a war, we begin to doubt Mr Birling's judgement. (If he is wrong about the war, what else will he be wrong about?)

§ He is extremely selfish: o He wants to protect himself and his family. He

believes that socialist ideas that stress the importance of the community are “nonsense” and that “a man has to make his own way.”

o He wants to protect Birling and Co. He cannot see that he did anything wrong when he fired Eva Smith - he was just looking after his business interests.

o He wants to protect his reputation. As the Inspector's investigations continue, his selfishness gets the better of him: he is worried about how the press will view the story in Act II, and accuses Sheila of disloyalty at the start of Act III. He wants to hide the fact that Eric stole money: “I've got to cover this up as soon as I can.”

§ At the end of the play, he knows he has lost the chance of his knighthood, his reputation in Brumley and the chance of Birling and Co. merging with their rivals. Yet he hasn't learnt the lesson of the play: he is unable to admit his responsibility for his part in Eva's death.

Mrs Sybil Birling

She is described at the start as “about fifty, a rather cold

woman and her husband's social superior.” She is a snob, very aware of the differences between social

classes. She is irritated when Mr Birling makes the social gaffe of praising the cook in front of Gerald and later is very dismissive of Eva, saying “Girls of that class.”

She has the least respect for the Inspector of all the characters. She tries - unsuccessfully - to intimidate him and force him to leave, then lies to him when she claims that she does not recognise the photograph that he shows her.

She sees Sheila and Eric still as “children” and speaks patronisingly to them.

She tries to deny things that she doesn't want to believe: Eric's drinking, Gerald's affair with Eva, and the fact that a working class girl would refuse money even if it was stolen,

claiming “She was giving herself ridiculous airs.” She admits she was “prejudiced” against the girl who

applied to her committee for help and saw it as her “duty” to refuse to help her. Her narrow sense of morality dictates that the father of a child should be responsible for its welfare, regardless of circumstances.

At the end of the play, she has had to come to terms that her son is a heavy drinker who got a girl pregnant and stole money to support her, her daughter will not marry a good social 'catch' and that her own reputation within the town will be sullied. Yet, like her husband, she refuses to believe that she did anything wrong and doesn't accept responsibility for her part in Eva's death.

Sheila Birling

She is described at the start as “a pretty girl in her early

twenties, very pleased with life and rather excited.” Even though she seems very playful at the opening, we

know that she has had suspicions about Gerald when she mentions “last summer, when you never came near me.” Does this suggest that she is not as naive and shallow as she first appears?

Although she has probably never in her life before considered the conditions of the workers, she shows her compassion immediately she hears of her father's treatment of Eva Smith: “But these girls aren't cheap labour - they're people.” Already, she is starting to change.

She is horrified by her own part in Eva's story. She feels full of guilt for her jealous actions and blames herself as “really responsible.”

She is very perceptive: she realises that Gerald knew

Daisy Renton from his reaction, the moment the Inspector mentioned her name. At the end of Act II, she is the first to realise Eric's part in the story. Significantly, she is the first to wonder who the Inspector really is, saying to him, 'wonderingly', “I don't understand about you.” She warns the others “he's giving us the rope - so that we'll hang ourselves” (Act II) and, near the end, is the first to consider whether the Inspector may not be real.

She is curious. She genuinely wants to know about Gerald's part in the story. It's interesting that she is not angry with him when she hears about the affair: she says that she respects his honesty. She is becoming more mature.

She is angry with her parents in Act 3 for trying to “pretend that nothing much has happened.” Sheila says “It frightens me the way you talk:” she cannot understand how they cannot have learnt from the evening in the same way that she has. She is seeing her parents in a new, unfavourable light.

At the end of the play, Sheila is much wiser. She can now judge her parents and Gerald from a new perspective, but the greatest change has been in herself: her social conscience has been awakened and she is aware of her responsibilities. The Sheila who had a girl dismissed from her job for a trivial reason has vanished forever.

Eric Birling

He is described at the start as “in his early twenties, not

quite at ease, half shy, half assertive.” Eric seems embarrassed and awkward right from the

start. The first mention of him in the script is “Eric suddenly guffaws,” and then he is unable to explain his laughter, as if he is nervous about something. (It is not until the final act that we realise this must be because of his having stolen some money.) There is another awkward moment when Gerald, Birling and Eric are chatting about women's love of clothes before the Inspector arrives. Do you feel that there is tension in Eric's relationship with his father?

It soon becomes clear to us (although it takes his parents longer) that he is a hardened drinker. Gerald admits, “I have gathered that he does drink pretty hard.”

When he hears how his father sacked Eva Smith, he supports the worker's cause, like Sheila. “Why shouldn't they try for higher wages?”

He feels guilt and frustration with himself over his relationship with the girl. He cries, “Oh - my God! - how stupid it all is!” as he tells his story. He is horrified that his thoughtless actions had such consequences.

He had some innate sense of responsibility, though, because although he got a woman pregnant, he was concerned enough to give her money. He was obviously less worried about stealing (or 'borrowing' from his father's office) than he was about the girl's future. So, was Eric, initially, the most socially aware member of the Birling family?

He is appalled by his parents' inability to admit their own responsibility. He tells them forcefully, “I'm ashamed of you.” When Birling tries to threaten him in Act III, Eric is aggressive in return: “I don't give a damn now.” Do you think Eric has ever stood up to his father in this way before?

At the end of the play, like Sheila, he is fully aware of his social responsibility. He is not interested in his parents' efforts to cover everything up: as far as he is concerned, the important thing is that a girl is dead. “We did her in all right.”

Gerald Croft

He is described as “an attractive chap about thirty, rather

too manly to be a dandy but very much the easy well-bred man-about-town.”

He is an aristocrat - the son of Lord and Lady Croft. We realise that they are not over-impressed by Gerald's engagement to Sheila because they declined the invitation to the dinner.

He is not as willing as Sheila to admit his part in the girl's death to the Inspector and initially pretends that he never knew her. Is he a bit like Mr Birling, wanting to protect his own interests?

He did have some genuine feeling for Daisy Renton, however: he is very moved when he hears of her death. He tells Inspector Goole that he arranged for her to live in his friend's flat “because I was sorry for her;” she became his mistress because “She was young and pretty and warm-hearted - and intensely grateful.”

Despite this, in Act 3 he tries to come up with as much

evidence as possible to prove that the Inspector is a fake - because that would get him off the hook. It is Gerald who confirms that the local force has no officer by the name of Goole, he who realises it may not have been the same girl and he who finds out from the infirmary that there has not been a suicide case in months. He seems to throw his energies into “protecting” himself rather than “changing” himself (unlike Sheila).

At the end of the play, he has not changed. He has not gained a new sense of social responsibility, which is why Sheila (who has) is unsure whether to take back the engagement ring.

Inspector Goole

He is described on his entrance as creating “an

impression of massiveness, solidity and purposefulness. He is a man in his fifties, dressed in a plain darkish suit. He speaks carefully, weightily, and has a disconcerting habit of looking hard at the person he addresses before actually speaking. “

He works very systematically; he likes to deal with “one person and one line of enquiry at a time.” His method is to confront a suspect with a piece of information and then make them talk - or, as Sheila puts it, “he's giving us the rope - so that we'll hang ourselves.”

He is a figure of authority. He deals with each member of the family very firmly and several times we see him “massively taking charge as disputes erupt between them.” He is not impressed when he hears about Mr Birling's influential friends and he cuts through Mrs Birling's obstructiveness.

He seems to know and understand an extraordinary amount:

He knows the history of Eva Smith and the Birlings' involvement in it, even though she died only hours ago. Sheila tells Gerald, “Of course he knows.”

He knows things are going to happen - He says “I'm waiting... To do my duty” just before Eric's return, as if he expected Eric to reappear at exactly that moment

He is obviously in a great hurry towards the end of the play: he stresses “I haven't much time.” Does he know that the real inspector is shortly going to arrive?

His final speech is like a sermon or a politician's. He leaves the family with the message “We are responsible for each other” and warns them of the “fire and blood and anguish” that will result if they do not pay attention to what he has taught them.

All this mystery suggests that the Inspector is not a 'real' person. So, what is he?

Is he a ghost? Goole reminds us of 'ghoul'. Is he the voice of Priestley? Is he the voice of God? Is he the voice of all our consciences? Do you have any other suggestions?

Eva Smith

Of course, we never see Eva Smith on stage in the play: we only have the evidence that the Inspector and the Birlings give us. The Inspector, Sheila Gerald and Eric all say that she was

“pretty.” Gerald describes her as “very pretty - soft brown hair and big dark eyes.”

Her parents were dead. She came from outside Brumley: Mr Birling speaks of her

being “country-bred.” She was working class. The Inspector says that she had kept a sort of diary,

which helped him piece together the last two years of her life:

However, in Act 3 we begin to wonder whether Eva ever really existed. Gerald says, “We've no proof it was the same photograph and therefore no proof it was the same girl.” Birling adds, “There wasn't the slightest proof that this Daisy Renton really was Eva Smith.” Yet the final

phone call, announcing that a police inspector is shortly to arrive at the Birlings' house to investigate the suicide of a young girl, makes us realise that maybe Eva Smith did exist after all. What do you think?

Think about Eva's name. Eva is similar to Eve, the first woman created by God in the Bible. Smith is the most common English surname. So, Eva Smith could represent every woman of her class.

Dramatic effect As you read the play, it is important to imagine yourself watching and listening to the action. The stage directions are important in helping us to imagine exactly what is going on The play is in 'real time' - in other words, the story lasts exactly as long as the play is on the stage. So, what happens in a comparatively short time to create such a dramatic contrast? How is the drama maintained and the audience involved?

Setting and Subtle Hints

The Setting and Lighting are very important. Priestley describes the scene in detail at the opening of Act 1, so that the audience has the immediate impression of a “heavily comfortable house.” The setting is constant (all action happens in the same place). Priestley says that the lighting should be “pink and intimate” before the Inspector arrives - a rose-tinted glow - when it becomes “brighter and harder.” The lighting reflects the mood of the play. The dining room of a fairly large suburban house, belonging to a prosperous manufacturer. It has good solid furniture of the period. At the moment they have all had a good dinner, are celebrating a special occasion, and are pleased with themselves. There are subtle hints that not is all as it seems. For example, early on we wonder whether the happy atmosphere is slightly forced. Sheila wonders where Gerald was last summer, Eric is nervous about something, Lord and Lady Croft did not attend the engagement dinner. This arouses interest in the audience - we want to find out what is going on!

Dramatic Irony and Tone

There is dramatic irony. For instance, the audience knows how wrong Mr Birling is when he makes confident predictions about there not being a war and is excited about the sailing of The Titanic: famously, the ship sank on her maiden voyage. This puts the audience at an advantage over the characters and makes us more involved. There is a lot of tension as each member of the family is found to have played a part in Eva's death. New pieces of information contribute to the story being constructed. The audience is interested in how each character reacts to the revelations.

The Inspector

The Inspector himself adds drama: He controls the pace and tension by dealing with one line

of enquiry at a time. Slowly the story of Eva's life is unravelled, like in a 'whodunnit'.

He is in command at the end of Act I and the start of Act 2, and the end of Act 2 and the start of Act 3. He is a brooding, inescapable presence, very much in control.

He is very mysterious and seems to know what is going to happen before it does. Tension and Timing

There are numerous changes in tone. For instance, Mr Birling's confidence is soon replaced - first by self-justification as he tries to explain his part in Eva's death, and then by anxiety. Timing of entrances and exits is crucial. For example, the Inspector arrives immediately after Birling has told Gerald about his impending knighthood and about how “a man has to look after himself and his own.” The Ending

The ending leaves the audience on a cliff-hanger. In Act 3 the Birlings believed themselves to be off the hook when it is discovered that the Inspector wasn't real and that no girl had died in the infirmary. This releases some of the tension - but the final telephone call, announcing that a real inspector is on his way to ask questions about the suicide of a young girl, suddenly restores the tension very dramatically. It is an unexpected final twist. THEMES 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 responsibility are 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.

Class

Apart from Edna the maid, the cast of the play does not include any lower class characters. We see only the rich, upwardly mobile Birlings and the upper class Gerald Croft. Yet we learn a lot about the lower class as we hear of each stage in Eva's life and we see the attitude the Birlings had for them. This table looks at the way the Birlings saw lower-class Eva when they came into contact with her, and the way that they see themselves within their own class. Characters

Attitudes to the lower class: Attitudes to the upper class:

At the start of the play, this character was...

To this character, Eva was...

Mr Birling

keen to be knighted to cement his hard-fought rise to the upper class

cheap labour

Sheila happy spending a lot of time in expensive shops

someone who could be fired out of spite

Gerald prepared to marry Sheila, despite her a mistress who could

lower social position be discarded at will Eric awkward about his 'public-school-and-

Varsity' life easy sex at the end of a drunken night out

Mrs Birling

socially superior to her husband, and embarrassed at his gaffes

a presumptuous upstart

The Palace Variety Theatre was a music hall. It was not seen as quite 'respectable' entertainment - probably not somewhere where Sheila would have gone. The stalls bar of the Palace Variety Theatre, where Eva Smith met both Gerald and Eric, was the bar for the lower classes and a favourite haunt of prostitutes. We could ask what Gerald and Eric were there in the first place! Alderman Meggarty, a local dignitary, also went there a lot.

Priestley is trying to show that the upper classes are unaware that the easy lives they lead rest upon hard work of the lower classes. Sex

Because Eva was a woman - in the days before women were

valued by society and had not yet been awarded the right to vote - she was in an even worse position than a lower class man. Even upper class women had few choices. For most, the best they could hope for was to impress a rich man and marry well - which could explain why Sheila spent so long in Milwards. For working class women, a job was crucial. There was no social security at that time, so without a job they had no money. There were very few options open to women in that situation: many saw no alternative but to turn to prostitution. Look at these quotations, showing the attitude to women

of some characters: 1. Mr Birling is dismissive of the several hundred

women in his factory: “We were paying the usual rates and if they didn't like those rates, they could go and work somewhere else.”

2. Gerald saw Eva as “young and fresh and charming” - in other words, someone vulnerable he could amuse himself by helping.

3. Mrs Birling couldn't believe that “a girl of that sort would ever refuse money.” Her charitable committee was a sham: a small amount of money was given to a small amount of women, hardly scratching the surface of the problem.

Why did Priestley decide to hinge his play on the death of a young working class woman rather than the death of a young working class man?

Age

The older generation and the younger generation take the Inspector's message in different ways. While Sheila and Eric accept their part in Eva's death and feel huge guilt about it, their parents are unable to admit that they did anything wrong. This table looks at these contrasting ideas: The Old (Mr and Mrs Birling)

The Young (Sheila and Eric)

The old are set in their ways. They are utterly confident that they are right and they see the young as foolish.

The young are open to new ideas. This is first seen early in Act 1 when both Eric and Sheila express sympathy for the strikers - an idea which horrifies Birling, who can only think of production costs and ignores the human side of the issue.

The old will do anything to protect themselves: Mrs Birling lies to the Inspector when he first shows her the

The young are honest and admit their faults. Eric refuses to try to cover his part up, saying, "the fact remains that I did what I did."

photograph; Mr Birling wants to cover up a potential scandal. They have never been forced to examine their consciences before and find they cannot do it now - as the saying goes, 'you can't teach an old dog new tricks.'

Sheila and Eric see the human side of Eva's story and are very troubled by their part in it. They do examine their consciences.

Mr and Mrs Birling have much to fear from the visit of the 'real' inspector because they know they will lose everything.

Sheila and Eric have nothing to fear from the visit of the 'real' inspector because they have already admitted what they have done wrong, and will change.

Gerald Croft is caught in the middle, being neither very young nor old. In the end he sides with the older generation, perhaps because his aristocratic roots influence him to want to keep the status quo and protect his own interests. Ultimately, we can be optimistic that the young - those who will shape future society - are able to take on board the Inspector's message. SAMPLE QUESTIONS:

1. How does Priestley create a sense of drama in Act One once the Inspector arrives?

2. Who do the Inspector and Priestley believe is to blame for the death of Eva Smith?

3. Examine Priestleyʼs portrayal of Sheila Birling in the play. 4. How does Priestley show the differences in attitudes between the

generations in An Inspector Calls? 5. In Act 3 Birling says: “He wasnʼt an Inspector.” Shelia replies: “Well,

he inspected us all right.” Explore the effect the Inspector has on any three of the characters from the play.

6. How does Priestley show that tension is at the heart of family life in the Birling household?

7. How does the play portray attitudes toward women at the time? ʻInspector Goole merely functions as a mouthpiece for Priestleyʼs ideasʼ. To what extent do you agree with this interpretation of the Inspector?

8. Explore the significance of Gerald Croft in the play?

An Inspector Calls – Key Quotations Act One “The general effect is substantial and heavily comfortable, but not cosy and homelike.” (p. 1 – stage direction - shows the Birling family’s values). “…You ought to like this port, Gerald. As a matter of fact, Finchley told me it’s exactly the same port as your father gets from him.” (Birling – p.2. Birling trying to impress the socially superior Gerald). “(half serious, half playful) Yes – except for all last summer, when you never came near me, and I wondered what had happened to you.” (Shelia – p. 3 – foreshadowing of revelation involving Gerald and Eva). “…perhaps we may look forward to the time when Crofts and Birlings are no longer competing but are working together – for lower costs and higher prices!” (Birling - p. 4 – What does Birling also want out of Shelia’s marriage to Gerald?). “… Well don’t keep Gerald here too long. Eric – I want you a minute.” (Mrs Birling – p. 7 – Compare how Birling and Mrs Birling treat Eric in comparison to Gerald. Birling goes on to offer Gerald a cigar. Why are they treated so differently? What has Eric done?). “Yes. I remember…” (Eric – p. 9 – what does Eric remember about women’s love of clothes? How does this foreshadow what we learn about Eric and Eva/ Daisy?). “We hear a sharp ring of a front door bell.” (p. 10 – the entrance of Inspector Goole – how does this create tension?). “…Unless Eric’s been up to something. (Nodding confidentially to Birling). And that would be very awkward wouldn’t it?” (Gerald - p. 10 – although Gerald means this jokingly, what does this show about Eric’s character? How does this foreshadow events?). “Just keep quiet, Eric and don’t get excited…” (Birling – p. 13 – how does Birling treat Eric? Why does he do this? What does this reveal about the family relationships?). “We were paying the usual rates and if they didn’t like those rates, they could go and work somewhere else. It’s a free country, I told them.” (Birling – p. 15 – look at how Birling uses the words ‘we’ and ‘they/them’ to talk about the workers as something different to him. It shows how he treats them as if they are not human. How does Gerald’s language show he has a similar approach to his workers?). “But these girls aren’t cheap labour – they’re people.” (Shelia – p. 19 – Shelia supports the Inspector and provides the moral message. How does this differ from her father’s opinion?). “He moves nearer a light … and she crosses to him. He produces the photograph/ She looks at it closely, recognizes it with a little cry, gives a half-stifled sob, and then runs out… The other three stare in amazement for a moment.” (Stage direction – p. 21 – how does the use of photograph, and how the Inspector hides it, create dramatic tension?).

“(Pulling himself together) D’you mind if I give myself a drink, Shelia?” (Gerald – p. 25. How does Gerald’s reaction to the name Daisy Renton reveal his involvement? Shelia works out Gerald was involved straight away. What does this show about her character?).

OF MICE AND MEN To understand the context of John Steinbeck's book, you need to know a bit about Steinbeck himself, and a little about economic conditions in 1930's America.

John Steinbeck

John Steinbeck John Steinbeck was born in Salinas, California in 1902. Although his family was wealthy, he was interested in the lives of the farm labourers and spent time working with them. He used his experiences as material for his writing. He wrote a number of novels about poor people who worked on the land and dreamed of a better life, including The Grapes of Wrath, which is the heart-rending story of a family's struggle to escape the dust bowl of the West to reach California. Steinbeck was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1962, six years before his death in 1968.

The Depression

On October 29 1929, millions of dollars were wiped out in an event that became known as the Wall Street Crash. It led to the Depression in America which crippled the country from 1930 - 1936. People lost their life savings when firms and banks went bust, and 12 - 15 million men and women - one third of America's population - were unemployed. There was then no dole to fall back on, so food was short and the unemployed in cities couldn't pay their rent. Some ended up in settlements called 'Hoovervilles' (after the US president of the time, Herbert C Hoover), in shanties made from old packing cases and corrugated iron. A song about an unemployed man meeting an old friend he has fought alongside in the First World War and asking him for a dime (the price of a cup of coffee) summed up the national mood. Brother, can you spare a dime? Once in khaki suits, Gee we looked swell, Full of Yankee Doodle-de-dum. Half a millin boots went sloggin' through Hell, I was the kid with the drum. Say, don't you remember, they called me Al, It was Al all the time. Why don't you remember I'm your pal, Brother, can you spare a dime? Migrant farmers

Added to the man-made financial problems were natural ones. A series of droughts in southern mid-western states like Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas led to failed harvests and dried-up land. Farmers were forced to move off their land: they couldn't repay the bank-loans which had helped buy the farms and had to sell what they owned to pay their debts. Many economic migrants headed west to 'Golden' California, thinking there would be land going spare, but the Californians turned many back, fearing they would be over-run. The refuges had nowhere to go back to, so they set up home in huge camps in the California valleys - living in shacks of

cardboard and old metal - and sought work as casual farmhands.

Migrant farmworkers. © New Deal Network Ranch hands

Against this background, ranch hands like George and Lennie were lucky to have work. Ranch hands were grateful for at least a bunk-house to live in and to have food provided, even though the pay was low.

Farmworkers' buckhouses

Think about how the men agree to hush-up the fight between Curley and Lennie and claim that Curley got his hand caught in a machine: they know that Lennie and George would be fired if the boss came to hear of it, and then Lennie and George could be left with nothing. PLOT

The story begins when George and Lennie prepare to arrive at a ranch to work - and ends in tragedy just four days later. The story is told in the third person, so we are provided with a clear, unbiased view of all the characters.

Chapter 1

George and Lennie camp in the brush by a pool, the night before starting new jobs as ranch hands. George finds Lennie stroking a dead mouse in his pocket. He

complains that caring for Lennie prevents him from living a freer life. We find out that Lennie's innocent petting of a girl's dress led to them losing their last jobs in Weed. However, when they talk about their dream of getting a piece of land together, we know they really depend on each other. Chapter 2

When they arrive at the ranch in the morning, George and Lennie are shown around by old Candy. They meet their boss and, later, his son, Curley - George is suspicious of Curley's manner and warns Lennie to stay away from him. They see Curley's pretty and apparently flirtatious wife and meet some of their fellow workers, Slim and Carlson.

Chapter 3

Later that evening, George tells Slim about why he and Lennie travel together and more about what happened in Weed. The men talk about Candy's ancient dog, which is tired and ill. Carlson shoots it, as an act of kindness. George tells Candy about their dream of getting a piece of land and Candy eagerly offers to join them - he has capital, so they could make it happen almost immediately. Curley provokes Lennie into a fight, which ends up with Lennie severely injuring Curley's hand. Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Next afternoon, Lennie accidentally kills the puppy that Slim had given him by petting it too much. He's sad. Curley's wife finds him and starts talking very openly about her feelings. She invites Lennie to stroke her soft hair, but he does it so strongly she panics and he ends up killing her too. He runs away to hide, as George had told him. Candy finds the body and tells George. They tell the other men - Curley wants revenge. Chapter 6

CHARACTER Not many people had real friends in the American West in the 1930s - it was a case of every man for himself. That is one of the reasons why the story of George and Lennie's unusual friendship is so poignant. They have each other. No one else in the novel is so lucky.

George Milton

He is a small man, but has brains and a quick wit. He has been a good friend to Lennie, ever since he

promised Lennie's Aunt Clara that he would care for him. He looks after all Lennie's affairs, such as carrying his work card, and tries to steer him out of potential trouble.

He needs Lennie as a friend, not only because Lennie's strength helps to get them both jobs, but so as not to be lonely. His threats to leave Lennie are not really serious. He is genuinely proud of Lennie.

He shares a dream with Lennie to own a piece of land and is prepared to work hard to build up the money

needed to buy it. “...with us it ain't like that. We got a future. We got

somebody to talk to that gives a damn about us. We don't have to sit in no bar room blowin' in our jack 'jus because we got no place else to go. If them other guys gets in jail they can rot for all anybody gives a damn. But not us.”

He is honest with people he trusts. For example, he tells Slim that he used to play tricks on Lennie when they were young, but now feels guilty about it as Lennie nearly drowned.

Lennie Small

He is a big man, in contrast to his name. He has limited intelligence, so he relies on George to look

after him. He copies George in everything George does and trusts George completely.

“Behind him (George) walked his opposite, a huge man, shapeless of face, with large, pale eyes, with wide, sloping shoulders; and he walked heavily, dragging his feet a little, the way a bear drags his paws. His arms did not swing at his sides, but hung loosely.”

He shares a dream with George to own a piece of land. Lennie's special job would be to tend the rabbits.

He likes to pet soft things, like puppies and dead mice. We know this got him into trouble in Weed when he tried to feel a girl's soft red dress: she thought he was going to attack her.

He can be forgetful - George continually has to remind him about important things.

He is very gentle and kind, and would never harm

anyone or anything deliberately. He is extremely strong: he can work as well as two men

at bucking barley. He is often described as a child or an animal - he drinks from the pool like a horse and his huge hands are described as paws. Slim

Slim is the jerkline skinner (lead mule-team driver) at

the ranch. He is excellent at his job. He is the natural leader at the ranch. Everyone respects

his views and looks up to him. He has a quiet dignity: he doesn't need to assert himself

to have authority. “there was a gravity in his manner and a quiet so

profound that all talked stopped when he spoke. His authority was so great that his word was taken on any subject, be it politics or love.”

He understands the relationship between George and Lennie. He helps George at the end and reassures George that he did the right thing.

We know little else about him, which gives him a slightly mysterious quality. Do you think he is too good to be true? Curley

Curley is the boss's son, so he doesn't need to work like

the ordinary ranch hands, and he has time to kill. He's little - so he hates big guys. He is a prize-fighter and looks for opportunities for a

fight. “He glanced coldly at George and then at Lennie. His

arms gradually bent at the elbows and his hands closed into fists. He stiffened and went into a slight crouch. His glance was at once calculating and pugnacious.”

He is newly-married and is very possessive of his wife -

but he still visits brothels. There is a rumour that he wears a glove filled with Vaseline to keep his hand soft for his wife.

Curley's wife

She is newly married to Curley. We never know her name - she is merely Curley's

'property' with no individual identity. She is young, pretty, wears attractive clothes and curls

her hair. She seems flirtatious and is always hanging around the

bunk-house. She is lonely - there are no other women to talk to and

Curley is not really interested in her. “What kinda harm am I doin' to you? Seems like they

ain't none of them cares how I gotta live. I tell you I ain't used to livin' like this. I coulda made somethin' of myself.”

She doesn't like Curley - she tells Lennie that she only

married him when she didn't receive a letter she'd been promised to get into Hollywood.

She is naive. Crooks

Crooks is the black stable hand or buck. He is the only permanent employee at the ranch, since

he injured his back in an accident. His back gives him constant pain.

He is the only black man around and is made to be isolated by his colour - he can't go into the bunk-house or socialise with the men.

He is always called the 'nigger' by the men, which shows how racism is taken for granted. The men don't mean to insult Crooks every time they call him this, but they never think to use his name

All this has made him proud and aloof. He is lonely.

“S'pose you didn't have nobody. S'pose you couldn't go into the bunk house and play rummy 'cause you were black... A guy needs somebody - to be near him... I tell ya a guy gets too lonely an' he gets sick.”

The only time he mixes with the ranch hands socially is when they pitch horseshoes - and then he beats everyone!

He has his own room near the stables and has a few possessions. He has books, which show he is intelligent and an old copy of the California Civil Code, which suggests he is concerned about his rights.

He has seen many men come and go, all dreaming of buying a piece of land, but is now cynical, as no one has ever achieved it. Candy

Candy is the oldest ranch hand. He lost his right hand in

an accident at work.

He is the 'swamper' - the man who cleans the bunkhouse. He knows he will be thrown out and put 'on the county' when he is too old to work.

Because of this, he accepts what goes on and doesn't challenge anything: he can't afford to lose his job.

He has a very old dog, which he has had from a pup. It is his only friend and companion.

“The old man came slowly into the room. He had his broom in his hand. And at his heels there walked a drag-footed sheep dog, gray of muzzle, and with pale, blind old eyes.”

Carlson insists on shooting the dog because he claims it is too old and ill to be of any use. Candy is devastated.

He is lonely and isolated, but makes friends with George and Lennie and offers his compensation money to help them all to buy a ranch together and achieve their dream.

When he finds Curley's wife dead, he is furious, as he knows instantly that Lennie was involved and that they have lost their chance of achieving their dream. A theme is an idea that runs through a text. A text may have one theme or many. Understanding the themes makes the text more than 'just' a text - it becomes something more significant, because we're encouraged to think more deeply about the text, to work out what lies beneath its surface.

Of Mice and Men

The title of the book comes from a poem by the 18th century Scottish poet Robert Burns. It is about a mouse which carefully builds a winter nest in a wheat field, only for it to be destroyed by a ploughman. It is written in Scots dialect. The best laid schemes o' mice an' men Gang aft a-gley, An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain, For promised joy! (The best laid schemes of mice and men Often go wrong And leave us nothing but grief and pain, Instead of promised joy!) The mouse had dreamed of a safe, warm winter and is now faced with the harsh reality of cold, loneliness and possible death. There is a parallel here with George and Lennie's joyful fantasy of a farm of their own, and its all-too-predictable destruction at the end of the story. Perhaps it is also meant to

suggest to us how unpredictable our lives are, and how vulnerable to tragedy. Loneliness and Dreams

The two main themes in 'Of Mice and Men' - foreshadowed by the reference to Burns' mouse - are loneliness and dreams. They interlock: people who are lonely have most need of dreams to help them through. Study the table below, showing both the loneliness and the dreams of each of the main characters. You could use a table like this as the basis for an exam answer about themes in Of Mice and Men. Loneliness and Dreams in Of Mice and Men Loneliness Dream George

George is not lonely during the novel, as he has

George and Lennie share a dream - to own a little patch of land and live

Lennie. He will be lonely afterwards, without his best friend.

on it in freedom. He is so set on the idea that he even knows of some land that he thinks they could buy.

Lennie Lennie is the only character who is innocent enough not to fear loneliness, but he is angry when Crooks suggests George won't come back to him.

George and Lennie share a dream - to own a little patch of land and live on it in freedom. Lennie's main desire is to tend the soft-haired rabbits they will keep.

Curley's wife

She is married to a man she doesn't love and who doesn't love her. There are no other women on the ranch and she has nothing to do. She tries to befriend the men by hanging round the bunkhouse.

She dreams of being a movie star. Her hopes were raised by a man who claimed he would take her to Hollywood, but when she didn't receive a letter from him, she married Curley.

Candy When Candy's ancient, ill dog was shot, Candy has nothing left. He delayed killing the dog, even though he knew deep down that it was the best thing, as he dreaded losing his long-time companion.

Candy joins George and Lennie's plan of owning a piece of land. His savings make the dream actually possible to achieve.

Crooks

Crooks lives in enforced solitude, away from the other men. He is bitter about being a ‘back-busted nigger’. He is thrilled when Lennie and Candy come into his room and are his companions for a night.

Crooks dreams of being seen as equal to everyone else. He knows his civil rights. He remembers fondly his childhood, when he played with white children who came to his family's chicken ranch, and longs for a similar relationship with white people again.

So, you know the context and you've thought carefully about the plot, characters and themes of the story - now it's time to think about how you might use all these ideas in the exam!

Preparation

Have a go at planning and writing your answer away from the computer OR stick around and write your answer in the writing frame below. Either way, remember that when you make a point, you need to support it with a quotation and then explain exactly how the quotation highlights what you want to show. You are advised to spend 45 minutes on this part of the paper, so divide your time up like this:

Pie chart Ten minutes planning your answer Thirty minutes writing your answer Five minutes checking your answer

suggested essay titles: 1. Discuss the relationship between George and Lennie. 2. Discuss the ways in which characters communicate with one another in the story. 3. Discuss the role of foreshadowing in ‘Of Mice and Men’. Suggested Essay Topics 4. Discuss the book’s view of relationships between men. 5. Analyse Steinbeck’s portrayal of Curley’s wife as the lone female on the all-male ranch. 6. Paying attention to the long descriptive passages at the beginning of each section, discuss the ways in which the novella is similar to a theatrical play. Do these similarities strengthen or weaken the work? How? 7. Discuss George’s actions at the end of the story. How can we justify what he does to Lennie? How can we condemn it? 8. Discuss Steinbeck’s descriptions of the natural world. What role does nature play in the novella’s symbolism? 9. Analyse the characters of Slim, Crooks, and Curley. What role does each character play?

Study Guide and Sample Essays on

OF MICE AND MEN

by John Steinbeck

• Characters • Plot synopsis • Themes • Genre/style • Critical context • Useful quotations • Sample essays

o Steinbeck’s use of stereotypes in the novel Of Mice and Men (629 words)

o The friendship between George and Lennie in Of Mice and Men (514 words) o Describe the devices Steinbeck uses to create atmosphere in Of Mice and Men (442

words) o Dreams and Reality in the novel Of Mice and Men (552 words)

Characters George Milton George Milton is the central character in the story. He is described as ‘small and quick, dark of face with restless eyes and sharp, strong features’. He looks after Lennie and dreams of a better life. George symbolises the migrant worker’s way of life. He leads a nomadic existence, moving from ranch to ranch to find work. The only thing that keeps him going is his dream of owning his own ranch, although deep down he knows it is only an illusion and will never actually happen. He needs Lennie’s friendship to stave off his major fear, which is loneliness. He is loyal to Lennie because he knows that he is an innocent but outwardly his attitude is one of intolerance. George has a strong understanding of the possibilities in a situation and, as Lennie’s self-appointed protector, he has to think and plan for him too. His feelings for Lennie have deep roots. This is demonstrated by his revelation of the time he asked Lennie to jump into the Sacramento river although he couldn’t swim. He describes to Slim how guilty he felt afterwards and it is obvious he has come to appreciate the basic decency of Lennie’s nature. ‘He damn near drowned before we could get him. An’ he was so damn nice to me for pullin’ him out. Clean forgot I told him to jump in. Well, I ain’t done nothing like that no more.’ This revelation shows that George is capable of moral growth, which is exemplified by his killing of Lennie at the end of the novel. Lennie Small Lennie Small is a mentally retarded man who travels with George. He dreams of ‘living off the fatta' the lan’ and being able to tend to rabbits. He has a child's mental ability but is very strong physically and is sometimes unable to control his own strength. This results in a series of accidental killings when the objects of his affection try to escape him (for example, mice and his puppy). He loves to listen to George’s plans for their shared future. Not only are we made aware of Lennie’s physical size, he is also described to the reader in terms of a series of running animal associations. He

is seen, for example, as a bear and as a domestic dog, but these associations enhance rather than undermine his innocence. He is vulnerable and yet he has a certain amount of cunning in concealment and knows how to get his way with George. He threatens to go to a cave and fend for himself, knowing that George won’t let this happen. Candy

Candy is an old ranch worker who has lost a hand in an accident and is near the end of his useful life on the ranch. He knows he has little to look forward to, especially when another ranch hand, Carlson, decides to kill his old dog because it annoys everyone in the bunk house with its bad smell. He has a little bit of money put by and decides he wants to contribute towards George and Lennie’s little ranch, as long as he can be a part of the dream. ‘S’pose I went in with you guys. That’s three hundred and fifty bucks I’d put in… How’d that be? ‘ Candy’s desperate attempt to be a part of the dream shows how lonely he is. Curley Curley is the ranch owner’s son. He is aggressive and was once a semi-professional boxer. He has a jealous nature and is domineering, particularly towards his wife. He immediately takes a dislike to Lennie. He is very self-important. He thinks he owns his wife and that he can dictate what she can and can’t do.

Curley's wife

Curley’s wife is young and pretty but is referred to as a ‘tart’ by the men and mistrusted by her husband. The other characters refer to her only as ‘Curley's wife’. If she tries to talk to the ranchmen they ignore her, because they are afraid of Curley. She has no female friends and so she feels very isolated. Candy believes her to be the cause of all that goes wrong at Soledad: ‘Ever'body knowed you'd mess things up. You wasn't no good.’ The workers, George included, see her as having ‘the eye’ for every man on the ranch, and they cite this as the reason for Curley's insecurity and hot-headed temperament. Like George and Lennie, she once had a dream. She dreamt of becoming an actress and living in Hollywood; now, full of self-pity, she is married to an angry man, and lives on the ranch without any friends and is seen as a trouble-maker by everyone there. Slim Slim is a ‘jerk line skinner’ (the main driver of a mule team), referred to as ‘prince of the ranch’. Slim decides on the mercy-killing of Candy's dog. It is Slim who helps Lennie avoid getting sacked after his fight with Curley. He is wise and humane. He understands George’s friendship with Lennie. He is angry Curley suspects him of seeing his wife and is treated by Steinbeck in an idealised manner. He is the judge, holding the balance between right and wrong. Though he is a man of few words, he conveys his understanding and acceptance of George’s shooting of Lennie: ‘You hadda, George. I swear you hadda. Come on with me.’ Crooks Crooks is the only African American hand on the ranch. Like Candy he is crippled, hence his nickname which refers to his crooked back resulting from being kicked by a horse. He sleeps apart from the other workers because the society in which he resides in is racist. He, like most of the other characters in the novel, suffers from extreme loneliness:

‘A guy goes nuts if he ain’t got nobody. Don’t matter no difference who the guy is, longs he with you. I tell ya a guy gets too lonely an he gets sick.’ Carlson

Carlson is a ranch hand who wants to shoot Candy's old dog because he doesn't like its smell. He says it is useless and old. He seems to accept Slim’s word as law and does not emerge as a positive character. The Boss

The Boss is Curley's father, the owner and director of the ranch. Whit

Whit is only concerned with what he thinks is good living, going down to the cat-house on Saturdays and reading pulp magazines and playing cards in the bunkhouse. However much can be said of Whit; he is the typical migrant farmworker and his lack of fulfilment in his life is shown by his proud excitement about the pulp fiction magazine having a letter from Bill Tenner – a guy he used to vaguely know from the ranch –in it.

-

Also, the way Whit invites George into town (but not Lennie), because ‘you got idears’ (sic) , shows the criteria for the alpha males is to be both strong and smart.

Plot Synopsis The main characters are two migrant workers in California during the Great Depression. One is George Milton and the other Lennie Small. George is described as ‘small and quick, dark of face, with restless eyes and sharp, strong features. Every part of him was defined: small, strong hands, slender arms, a thin and bony nose.’ Lennie is large and physically strong but mentally retarded. He is described as ‘a huge man, shapeless of face, with large, pale eyes, with wide sloping shoulders.’ The two unlikely friends have come to a ranch in Soledad, California to ‘work up a stake’. They hope one day to fulfill their shared dream of settling down on their own piece of land. Lennie's part of the dream, which he never tires of hearing George describe, is merely to have soft rabbits on the farm, which he can pet. George protects Lennie from himself by telling him that if he gets into trouble he won't let him ‘tend them rabbits’. They are escaping from their previous employment in a place called Weed. The childlike Lennie was run out of town, with George accompanying him, because Lennie's love of stroking soft things resulted in an accusation of attempted rape when he touched a young woman's dress. At the ranch, the dream appears to become possible. Candy, the aged, one-handed ranch-hand, even offers to put money in with Lennie and George so they can buy the farm by the end of the month. The dream crashes when Lennie accidentally kills the young and attractive wife of Curley, the ranch owner's son, while trying to stroke her hair. A lynch mob led by Curley gathers. George, realising he is doomed to a life of loneliness and despair like the rest of the migrant workers, and wanting to spare Lennie a painful death at the hands of the violent mob, shoots Lennie in the back of the head before the mob can find him. The shot comes while Lennie is distracted by one last retelling of the dream.

*****

Themes

There are many important themes in this novel including the importance of loyalty and friendship, loneliness, fate, racial intolerance, class conflict, mental disability, idealism and reality.

The title of the novel is taken from Robert Burns’ famous poem written in November 1785 ‘To a Mouse, on turning her up in her nest with the Plough’. The reference comes in the seventh verse, the last two lines of which read: ‘The best laid schemes o’ mice and men Gang aft a-gley.’ The last line means ‘often go wrong’. Burns and Steinbeck share the same pessimistic views on fate. In the book, the two main characters, George and Lennie, share a dream. George dreams of a piece of land of his own. Lennie dreams of tending rabbits. We are introduced to them both at the beginning of the book. As the two talk, it becomes clear that Lennie has a mental disability but is deeply devoted to George and dependent upon him for protection. Loneliness is a recurrent theme in the novel. ‘Guys like us,’ George says, ‘that work on the ranches, are the loneliest guys in the world. They got no family. They don't belong no place.’ Lennie replies: ‘But not us. And why. Because . . . because I got you to look after me, and you got me to look' after you, and that's why.’ The alternative to the companionship that George and Lennie share is loneliness. George frequently affirms the fraternity between them. ‘He's my . . . cousin,’ George tells the ranch boss. ‘I told his old lady I'd take care of him‘. The boss is suspicious of the bond between George and Lennie, and the other characters in turn also question this friendship: they have simply never seen anything like it. In their world, isolation is the norm. Even Slim, who is usually sympathetic and understanding, expresses surprise. ‘Ain't many guys travel around together. I don't know why. Maybe ever'body in the whole damned world is scared of each other.’ Somewhat related to the theme of loneliness is racism, which also results in personal isolation. Crooks, the old black man on the ranch, lives alone, ostracised by the ranch hands because of his race. The barrier of racial prejudice is briefly broken, however, when Crooks becomes an ally in the dream to buy a farm. Crooks has a cynical honesty that illustrates Steinbeck's own criticism of American society's failures in the Depression era of the 1930s. Class conflict is another theme in the novel. Although George and Lennie have their dream, they are not in a position to attain it. In addition to their own personal limitations, they are also limited by their position in society. Their idealistic dream is eventually destroyed by an unfeeling, materialistic, modern society. The tensions between the characters are deeply embedded in the nature of American capitalism and its class system. Curley, the son of the ranch owner, is arrogant and always looking for a fight. This is not merely a personality trait. His position in society has encouraged this behavior; his real strength lies not in his fighting ability but in his power to fire any worker. Similarly, Carlson, the only skilled worker among the ranch hands, is arrogant and lacks compassion. Carlson would be difficult to replace in his job as a mechanic; therefore, he feels secure enough in his status to treat the other workers sadistically. This trait is seen when he orders Candy's dog to be shot and when he picks on Lennie. The other workers go along with Carlson because they are old or afraid of losing their jobs. Lennie's mental retardation also symbolises the helplessness of people in a capitalistic, commercial, competitive society. In this way, Steinbeck illustrates the confusion and hopelessness of the Depression era. Genre and Style Of Mice and Men is a tragic novel told from the point of view of a third-person omniscient narrator who can access the point of view of any character as required by the narrative. It is the first of Steinbeck's experiments with the novel-play form, which combines qualities of each genre. The novel in fact needed few changes before appearing as a play on Broadway. The language Steinbeck uses

varies from sentimental, tragic, doomed, fatalistic, rustic, moralistic and comic to poetic. The poetic element of Steinbeck’s style is balanced by the realism of the language his characters use. His writing is mainly simple and direct but sometimes the tone does become lyrical. Among the many literary devices Steinbeck uses in the story, the techniques of repetition and foreshadowing in order to build up to the climax of the tragedy are some of the most effective. Almost every scene points towards the dreadful ending. For instance, at the beginning of the book, we learn that Lennie likes to stroke mice and other soft creatures but has a tendency to kill them accidentally. This foreshadows the death of his puppy and the death of Curley’s wife. Also, when George reveals that Lennie once grabbed a woman’s dress and would not let go, the reader can more or less predict that similar trouble will arise at the ranch, especially once Curley’s wife appears on the scene. Finally, the scene in which Lennie brutally squeezes Curley’s hand foreshadows the force with which he grabs Curley’s wife by the throat, unintentionally breaking her neck. Lennie’s fate is also foreshadowed in the events surrounding Candy’s dog. Candy dotes on the dog in the same way that George is devoted to Lennie, yet he must survive the death of his companion, who is shot in the back of the head, just as Lennie is killed at the end of the book. When Candy says that he would rather have shot the dog himself rather than allow Carlson to do it, this episode clearly anticipates the difficult decision that George makes to shoot Lennie rather than leave him to the mercy of the ranch hands. The point of view of the novel is generally objective—not identifying with a single character—and limited to exterior descriptions. The third-person narrative point of view creates a sense of the impersonal. With few exceptions, the story focuses on what can be readily perceived by an outside observer: a river bank, a bunkhouse, a character's appearance, card players at a table. The focus on time, too, is limited to the present: there are no flashbacks to events in the past, and the reader only learns about what has happened to Lennie and George before the novel's beginning through dialogue between the characters. Thoughts, recollections, and fantasies are expressed directly by the characters.

***** Critical Context At the time of the book's publication, critical reaction was mostly positive, although at the end of the 1930s, after Steinbeck had written The Grapes of Wrath, there was some re-evaluation of Steinbeck's earlier work. Some critics complained that Of Mice and Men was flawed by sentimentality. Other critics faulted Steinbeck for his portrayal of poor, earthy characters. Critical opinions of Steinbeck's work have always been mixed. Both stylistically and in his emphasis on manhood and male relationships, which figure heavily in Of Mice and Men, Steinbeck was strongly influenced by his contemporary, Ernest Hemingway. Even though Steinbeck was hailed as a great author in the 1930s and 1940s, and won the Nobel Prize for literature in 1962, many critics have condemned his works as being superficial, sentimental, and too moralistic. Though Of Mice and Men is regarded by some as his greatest achievement, many critics argue that it suffers from one-dimensional characters and a contrived plot, which renders the lesson of the novel more important than the people in it. Recent criticism, beginning in the 1980s, has acknowledged that Steinbeck's best work is timeless at its deepest level. Over sixty years after its publication, Of Mice and Men is a classic of American literature. It has been translated into a dozen foreign languages. Useful quotations ‘A few miles south of Soledad, the Salinas River drops in close to the hillside bank and runs deep and green. The water is warm too, for it has slipped twinkling over the yellow sands in the sunlight before reaching the narrow pool.’ ‘Evening of a hot day started the little wind to moving among the leaves. The shade climbed up the hills toward the top. On the sand banks the rabbits sat as quietly as little gray, sculptured stones.’

‘Guys like us, that work on ranches, are the loneliest guys in the world. They got no family. They don't belong no place. . . . With us it ain't like that. We got a future. We got somebody to talk to that gives a damn about us. We don't have to sit in no bar room blowin' in our jack jus' because we got no place else to go. If them other guys gets in jail they can rot for all anybody gives a damn. But not us.’ ‘All kin's a vegetables in the garden, and if we want a little whisky we can sell a few eggs or something, or some milk. We'd jus' live there. We'd belong there. There wouldn't be no more runnin' round the country and gettin' fed by a Jap cook. No, sir, we'd have our own place where we belonged and not sleep in no bunk house.’ ‘Whatever we ain't got, that's what you want. God a'mighty, if I was alone I could live so easy. I could go get a job an' work, an no trouble. No mess at all, and when the end of the month come I could take my fifty bucks and go into town and get whatever I want. We could live offa the fatta the lan'.’ ‘He damn near drowned before we could get him. An’ he was so damn nice to me for pullin’ him out. Clean forgot I told him to jump in. Well, I ain’t done nothing like that no more.’ ‘I ain't got no people. I seen the guys that go around on the ranches alone. That ain't no good. They don't have no fun. After a long time they get mean. They get wantin' to fight all the time. . . 'Course Lennie's a God damn nuisance most of the time, but you get used to goin' around with a guy an' you can't get rid of him.’ ‘A water snake glided smoothly up the pool, twisting its periscope head from side to side; and it swam the length of the pool and came to the legs of a motionless heron that stood in the shallows. A silent head and beak lanced down and plucked it out by the head, and the beak swallowed the little snake while its tail waved frantically.’ ‘S'pose you didn't have nobody. S'pose you couldn't go into the bunk house and play rummy 'cause you was black. How'd you like that? S'pose you had to sit out here an' read books. Sure you could play horseshoes till it got dark, but then you got to read books. Books ain't no good. A guy needs somebody - to be near him. A guy goes nuts if he ain't got nobody. Don't make no difference who the guy is, long's he's with you. I tell ya, I tell ya a guy gets too lonely an' he gets sick.’ ‘I seen hunderds of men come by on the road an' on the ranches, with their bindles on their back an' that same damn thing in their heads. Hunderds of them. They come, an' they quit an' go on; an' every damn one of 'em's got a little piece of land in his head. An' never a God damn one of 'em ever gets it. Just like heaven. Everybody wants a little piece of lan'. I read plenty of books out here. Nobody never gets to heaven, and nobody gets no land. It's just in their head. They're all the time talkin' about it, but it's jus' in their head.’ ‘Never you mind. A guy got to sometimes.’

Sample Essays 1. Discuss Steinbeck’s use of stereotypes in his novel, Of Mice and Men

There is arguably not much character development in Steinbeck’s short novel, Of Mice and Men. The author concentrates on revealing his characters and presenting them as sympathetic or unsympathetic to focus the reader's attention on their predicament. The main characters in the novel are from the lowest social class. Both George and Lennie are poor and homeless. George is portrayed as intelligent but the reader gets the impression that he knows he is only fooling both himself and Lennie in inventing schemes to buy a ranch where the two of them will settle down to raise crops and livestock. Lennie is mentally retarded and has trouble understanding social situations. He is able to remember only selected information. The dream of living on his own place has stuck in his imagination, however, and he believes wholeheartedly in George's ability to make that dream come true.

George and Lennie are the only two characters in this short novel who are explained in any detail. The other characters could all be described as stereotypes. Even the names of the characters, which are all short and descriptive, say something about them: Slim, the capable uncomplaining ranch hand; Curley, the ranch owner's son, who is jealous of his wife and quick to pick fights; and Curley's wife who is a flirtatious young woman. She has no name indicating her powerless position on the ranch. The use of these stock characters adds to the plot. Crooks is a character who is mistreated in many ways because he is black. Crooks is the stable buck of the barn. It is not certain whether Crooks is his name, or his nickname, but we learn that he got kicked in the back by a horse and has had a crooked back ever since. Nevertheless he gets yelled at by the boss every time something’s wrong.

‘The boss gives him hell when he’s mad. But the stable buck don’t give a damn about that.’

He keeps his distance and demands that other people keep theirs. Crooks is bitter, indignant, angry and ultimately frustrated by his helplessness as a black man in a racist culture. He listens to Lennie's talk of the dream and of the farm with cynicism. Although tempted by Candy, Lennie, and George's plan to buy their own place, Crooks is constantly reminded (in this case by Curley's wife) that he is lower to whites and, out of pride, he refuses to take part in their future farm. Lennie is not so much stereotyped, but rather trapped because of his size. Because Lennie is so big, Curley thinks he has to prove something by beating up Lennie. Lennie is then forced to fight. ‘I don’t want no trouble,’ he says. ‘Don’t let him sock me, George.’ Curley’s wife is probably the most loathed person on the ranch. She is stereotyped as an empty-headed flirt. ‘Jesus, what a tramp,’ George says. ‘So that’s what Curley picks for a wife.’ The ranch hands don’t like or trust her because they think she’ll get them in trouble. They make judgments without getting to know her first. Curley, her husband, doesn’t trust her with the other ranch hands. In summary, by his clever use of stereotypes in this short novel, Steinbeck has highlighted important human issues, including the importance of friendship, the need for people to take responsibility for

others less fortunate than themselves, the tragedy of circumstances interfering with people's plans for the future and the insensitivity of some people toward those of different racial background, social status, or intellectual prowess. These social issues are dramatised in a carefully plotted story that keeps the reader's attention focused on the main characters, building to a violent climax in which the ethics of violent solutions to human problems are called into question. 629 words 2. Discuss the friendship between George and Lennie in Steinbeck’s novel Of Mice and Men The friendship that George and Lennie share forms the central part of the novel. The two men are different from all of the other characters in the story and Lennie sums this up when he states ‘I got you to look after me, and you got me to look after you, and that's why’. The initial interview by the ranch boss emphasises the unusual quality of their relationship and Slim too remarks on this later in the story when he says to George, 'Funny how you an' him string along together’. Although they are not related, they are linked together by a shared past, by a dream of the future, and by current circumstances. From Lennie’s perspective, George is the most important person in his life, his guardian and only friend. Every time he does anything that he knows is wrong, his first thought is of George’s disapproval. George, on the other hand, thinks of Lennie as a constant source of frustration. He has assumed responsibility for Lennie’s welfare and has, several times, been forced to run because of the trouble Lennie has unintentionally caused. Life with Lennie is not easy. ‘Whatever we ain't got, that's what you want. God a'mighty, if I was alone I could live so easy. I could go get a job an' work, an no trouble. No mess at all, and when the end of the month come I could take my fifty bucks and go into town and get whatever I want.’ However, despite George’s frequent bouts of anger and frustration and his long speeches about how much easier life would be without Lennie, George is clearly devoted to his friend. He flees from town to town not to escape the trouble Lennie has caused, but to protect Lennie from its consequences. In the same way that Lennie needs mice and pups and rabbits to take care of, George needs Lennie to look after. As George reveals to Slim, the incident that sealed the bond between the pair came when he told his friend to jump into the rushing Sacramento River and was then forced to save him from drowning. In a way, George also uses Lennie as an excuse for the hardships that he must endure. He continually claims that life would be ‘so easy’ for him were it not for the burden of caring for Lennie. However, despite the two men being so different, they have one thing in common. They both share the same dream of owning their own ranch and after many years of hard work, moving from ranch to ranch, living in complete poverty and working for very little remuneration, they finally seem to be getting nearer to achieving this lifelong dream. Lennie believes unquestioningly in their dream, and his faith enables the cynical George to imagine the possibility of this dream becoming reality. In fact, George’s belief in it depends upon Lennie, for as soon as Lennie dies, George’s hope for a brighter future disappears. It is really dependency and not brotherly love which unites the two men and maintains their friendship. (514 words) 3. Describe the devices Steinbeck uses to create atmosphere in Of Mice and Men. The story is set in California's Salinas Valley and the action takes place on a large ranch during the Great Depression. One of the ways Steinbeck creates atmosphere in the novel is the way in which he uses nature as a background and ‘medium’ of his characters. Nature is seen in minute detail. The opening of the novel illustrates this and the description is full of nostalgia. The tone is simple and immediate: ‘There is a path through the willows and among the sycamores, a path beaten hard by boys coming down form the ranches to swim in the deep pool, and beaten hard by tramps who come wearily down from the highway in the evening.’

There is a poetic element to Steinbeck’s style, as seen in the following quotations: the sycamores have ‘mottled, white, recumbent limbs’, the ‘rabbits sat as quietly as little grey sculptured stones’, a heron is ‘stilted’ and a lizard ‘makes a great skittering’. He uses various literary devices including similes and metaphors, onomatopoeia and personification. The closeness of man to nature is emphasised in the novel and Lennie is seen frequently as a bear or a dog; the imagery emphasising the simple responses of his nature.

The settings are simple in detail but powerfully symbolic. The secluded spot in the woods by the stream is the uncomplicated world of Nature; the bunkhouse is the bleak home of hired working men trying to make sense of their lives and gain comfort in a limited environment; the barn is the place of working life, of seed and harvest, birth and death, the harness room with Crook's bunk symbolises social constraints; the ‘little place of our own’ about which George and Lennie dream is the Paradise we all yearn for.

Light is another very important element in the novel which Steinbeck uses to create atmosphere. The natural light of the sun and the artificial light of the interiors is an important part of the author’s unvoiced commentary. The action begins on the evening of a hot day, continues with George and Lennie talking in darkness and half-darkness with the fire lighting the trunks of the trees until the ‘sphere of light’ from the fire grows smaller. The next day they go to the ranch house and we are told at 10 o’clock in the morning ‘the sun threw a bright, dust-laden bar through one of the side windows, and in and out of the beam flies shot like rushing stars’. The poetic element of Steinbeck’s style is balanced by the realism of the language his characters use. His writing is mainly simple and direct but sometimes the tone becomes lyrical. (442 words)

4. Dreams and Reality in John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men

The novel describes the life migrant ranch workers in rural America. It tells the tragic story of George Milton and Lennie Small, two lonely nomadic farm workers who belong nowhere. George protects the mentally retarded but physically strong Lennie from the tricks of both ranch bosses and other hands, but, in so doing, George has considerably reduced the possibilities of his own successful attainment of independence and peace. In order to soothe his childish companion, George has invented a fantasy in which both of them operate their own farm and Lennie, in particular, is in charge of the rabbits. It is a vision which immediately quiets any of the good-natured Lennie’s anxieties, as well as bringing comfort to the otherwise realistic and rather cynical George. When the two friends arrive at the latest farmhouse, Lennie promises faithfully to obey his companion and be good. George arranges jobs for both of them. Curley takes an immediate dislike to Lennie simply because of his strength. After a series of provocations, Lennie is drawn into a fight with Curley. Unable to control his massive strength, he breaks the bones of Curley’s hand before his co-workers can pull him away from the victim. From this moment on, Curley plans full revenge. The opportunity presents itself in the person of Curley’s own wife, a coarse but pathetically lonely creature who frequently attempts to attract advances from hired hands to relieve the tedium of her life on the ranch. Driven away from the bunkhouse in which the men have their quarters by her jealous husband, the young woman waits until all but Lennie have left the ranch, and then proceeds to engage him in conversation. So preoccupied with her own misery is the girl that she does not realise her potential danger. Enthusiastically recalling an opportunity she once had to appear in Hollywood films,

she invites Lennie to feel the soft texture of her hair. At first reticent, he is soon persuaded. Suddenly she is locked in his grasp and moments later, her dead body slumps to the floor of the bunkhouse. When George and Candy, a down-on-his-luck worker who had expressed great interest in joining the friends in their dream farm, realise what has happened, Lennie is told to take refuge in a secret place George had once designated for some emergency. Taking Curley’s gun, George waits for the others to form a search party. Raging with jealous anger and despair, Curley makes it clear that, when found, Lennie will not be brought back alive. During the course of the chase, George manages to separate from the others. Finding his friend at the appointed meeting place, he suggests that Lennie watch out across the river and try to picture that farm they will one day share. As his friend complies, George raises the gun and fires into the back of Lennie’s head. When the others catch up to him, George explains that he had happened to stumble upon Lennie who was killed in a struggle for the gun which he tried to use against George. The major figures in Steinbeck’s story are all driven by a compelling faith in the possibility of dreams coming true. George and Lennie are the protagonists and, in a certain sense, the author has them epitomize all the dreams of the others.

(552 words)

Of Mice and Men Writing Style

Straightforward, Colloquial, Unpretentious, Earnest

Steinbeck’s writing style mirrors his characters. Of course the author writes as the men would literally speak, but on a deeper level, the language of the book is simple but compelling – just like the characters. Because the language is easy to understand, it’s even more extraordinary that it can carry such lofty themes, feelings, and ideas. Though the characters never gush about each other, it’s clear that they feel deeply. Steinbeck achieves this by using simple language to build characters who are more than what they say. For example, while George says he and Lennie just got used to each other, what he’s really feeling is that their friendship is the only thing he’s ever really had to hold on to. The language, like the men on the ranch, seems simple enough, but it’s more "still waters run deep" than "OMG you’re my BFFL." Again, Steinbeck uses his writing style as another means to suggest that every story is important, no matter whose story it is. Though these characters are working class people who don’t have access to big vocabularies or grand philosophies, they can still communicate about the things that really matter. This all comes through in the dialogue that dominates the book, and is only occasionally

augmented by the narration. The narrative style can differ slightly from the simplicity of the dialogue (like when the narrator is so effusive in describing Slim), but usually even the narration tells the most gripping stuff in a straightforward manner. When George kills Lennie, Steinbeck lets the language be as stark and straightforward as the act, making it all the more shocking. Part of Steinbeck’s brilliance is this subtle usage of language: when he needs to make words sing, he can, but usually he’s good enough that the action doesn’t seem like it’s clouded over with poetry. Instead, it just reads like real life.