Mr Birling, A Character Analysis
This is the first in our series of character analyses of the main characters in the play, ‘An Inspector Calls’.
It follows on from our series of articles on the themes of the play and the two, the themes and the characters are closely related and cannot be understood without each other. The themes cannot be understood without seeing how the writer Priestley, uses the characters to highlight certain themes and of course vice versa, the themes and issues being explored in the play naturally affect the characters and also play a big part in their way of looking at things.
To read the articles on the themes you can click on each of the links below:
1. An Inspector Calls’, themes, part 1: Class division and social responsibility
The role/function of the Mr Birling character in the play.
To really understand Mr Birling and his role and function in the play, we need to understand what his ‘creator’ , J.B. Priestley is trying to do and why he ‘created’ Mr Birling.
Mr Birling, it can be argued, exists in the play to represent the wealthy capitalist class of modern Britain and to critique that class. Birling is similar to Ebenezer Scrooge in the Christmas Carol in that he is a wealthy businessman but far from generous. Priestley like his predecessor Dickens is attempting to encourage social responsibility and active assistance of the poor by the wealthier in society and using literature to do so by highlighting the plight of the poor and critiquing the wealthy who at times neglect them.
How successful were they in this? Well millions have heard of them and their works and continue to ready, study and discuss their plays today and Priestley himself was a politician involved in socialism, a political ideology which focuses on a more equal distribution of wealth and heavy government assistance for the poor but often by taxing the wealthy. People such as Priestley helped to create the ‘Welfare State’ in Britain which included free medical treatment for all and government money paid to people without jobs.
Click on the Link to Read About: Mr Birling Key Quotes
Arthur Birling, a brief description.
Priestly described Birling as a ‘heavy-looking man’ which means that he is big or maybe even slightly overweight. He also has a ‘provincial’ accent. What does provincial mean? Well in modern Britain, the ‘correct’ (in many people’s eyes) way of speaking or accent is what is called ‘RP’ which stands for Received Pronunciation. This is the way middle class people from the south-east of England or those educated in elite private schools (ironically in Britain called ‘public schools’ though you have to pay to study there) speak.
Accents different to those are considered by many to be ‘incorrect’ or at least less prestigious. Such regional accents include:
- Cockney, accent originally of working class Londoners but now many throughout the south-east.
- Scouse, accent of Liverpudlians.
- ‘Brummy’, accent of people from the second biggest English city, Birmingham.
- Geordie, accent of people from Newcastle or the north-east.
- Mancunian, accent of people from Manchester.
- Yorkshire, accent of Yorkshire.
In modern Britain, perhaps slightly less than a few decades back, people who want to progress upwards socially have to ‘soften’ their regional accent and make it more ‘neutral’ or more similar to the standard RP accent. In fact speaking with a very ‘thick’ Cockney, Brummy, Scouse accent would make you be considered a bit ‘uneducated’ or less sophisticated even by people who maybe from those areas, who may be fine with the usage of Cockney, Brummy, Scouse in an informal context but not in a more serious or official context. That is purely speaking about the accent and not even various slang words in those dialects.
Birling’s ‘provincial’ accent, the word Priestley himself uses clearly indicates that though he may have money now his roots are more humble and that he maybe what some call ‘nouveau riche’, a French term used in the English language which literally means ‘nouveau’ i.e. new, ‘riche’ i.e. rich or ‘new rich’.
It’s a slightly negative term implying that the person became rich recently but does not have the upbringing or culture to spend his wealth wisely and may use his money in flamboyant and extravagant clothes with inappropriate dress sense which a person from a traditionally rich family wouldn’t.
There is no mention of Birling and his dress sense but Birling occupies an intermediate space between the traditionally rich classes and the working class poor. He may have come from a poor or not so wealthy background and managed to become wealthy. This however is not enough, Birling still wants more.
An inferiority complex?
One of the most interesting questions that can be asked about Mr Birling, is does he have an inferiority complex?
What is an inferiority complex?
An inferiority complex can be understood in different ways, but one way it can be understood is that sometimes someone is missing or lacking something in order to gain social approval. You can also be very conscious that you do not have a particular quality e.g. the correct accent, income and so forth and this makes you feel uncomfortable (a complex) and this can result in exaggerated attempts to gain that ‘correct accent’, status and so on.
Mr Birling it could be argued occupies a sort of ‘no-man’s land’ between the working classes, whom he may have originally been from and whom he does not seem to care about much, and between the traditionally rich who would have a different accent and upbringing to his and also different ancestors and family, some of whom might look down on him as ‘nouveau riche’ or as ‘new money’ and as sort of inferior. We can see a glimpse of this in the quote:
““I have an idea that your mother – Lady Croft – feels you might have done better for yourself socially” (Act 1)
This is in relation to his suspicion that Gerald Croft’s family might feel that the Birlings are not as ‘good’ as them socially, a clear reference to the social hierarchy of that time.
Another of Birling’s most interesting quotes is.
‘You! You don’t seem to care about anything. But I care. I was almost certain for a knighthood in the next Honours List’ (Act 3)
This follows on from earlier in the play where Birling says:
‘I was an alderman for years – and Lord Mayor two years ago – and I’m still on the Bench – so I know the Brumley officers pretty well’ (Act 1)
We can see from this that having lots of money, a nice house, a wife (Mrs Birling) from a socially privileged background and children, are not enough. Birling is constantly seeking to get more and more in terms of his status and social standing. First an alderman, then a lord mayor and next to be knighted i.e. to be called ‘Sir Arthur Birling’.
Is this because Mr Birling is a competitive person who relishes challenges and just being more and more successful, or is it because something is eluding him, there is something elusive? Perhaps by getting a certain level of prestige he will not feel uncomfortable around wealthy people from traditionally wealthy families, such as the Crofts. Or is it a combination of both?
What is interesting is that Birling does indeed seem to think status is based not on how moral or virtuous or generous your character is but by how high you are in the social hierarchy.
The problem with this constant pursuit for being higher and higher in the social hierarchy is that it always be a source of pain. Once you become a knight you are still ‘inferior’ to the traditional landed aristocracy, to the barons and earls and counts of England, and even if you became one of those you might be ‘junior’ aristocracy as opposed to ‘higher aristocracy’ who themselves are lower to ‘royalty’, something which Mr Birling could never have become even by marriage in 1912 England (when the play was set) or 1940s Britain when the play was first shown, as in that time society was far more traditional and the royal family could only marry from senior aristocracy/royalty.
The pursuit of position and status does not guarantee happiness and maybe a constantly elusive one forever generating a feeling of inferiority. The opposite of that would be to be happy with who you are and rather than enrich yourself at the expense of others (e.g. the low wages Birling gives to his workers), help others, and through this helping of others you might gain a feeling of happiness and reward by the betterment of those worse off than you.
As we can see ‘An Inspector Calls’ is a very deep and profound play and perhaps Priestley is attempting to show that despite his big physical stature and rough and tough exterior constantly focusing on money and position, Birling is actually a weak individual.
Birling, the capitalist.
Birling however despite seeming to come from a humble background is nevertheless in this play a representative of the capitalist elite. He is a wealthy businessman and as we saw also a type of politician when he used to be lord mayor.
As discussed in a previous article where it is written:
“So Mr Birling is far from a figure of any credibility. What Priestly is doing on a deeper level is showing that wealthy capitalists despite being able to make money are not necessarily intellectually superior to ordinary people, that they are not always right. Therefore they have no automatic claim to intellectual leadership or priority in saying how society should operate. This is a very important point which many analysis of the play miss or do not mention.” (click here for original article)
Priestley shows that despite Birling being rich and a wealthy factory owner he is not necessarily that clever or smart. In fact he makes wildly foolish statements such as:
‘Fiddlesticks! The Germans don’t want war. Nobody wants war.’
“And I’m talking as a hard-headed, practical man of business. And I say there isn’t a chance of war. The world’s developing so fast that it’ll make war impossible.”
As we all know and as everyone who watches the play knows, Birling was totally wrong. The Germans did engage in war and so did the British.
17 million people died.
This alongside Birling’s belief that the Titanic would never sink, ‘The titanic- she sails next week’-‘Unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable’ (Act 1), any credibility or respect that we might have for Birling, and also on a deeper level Priestley might have been hoping that we would extend that to thinking that just because someone has made a lot of money he is not necessarily that clever or have a right in us listening to him and him playing a key role in deciding how society should be governed. Remember Birling is an influential man and close to powerful people who would decide how society should be.
Birling, as we have seen above, cares about labels and titles, Alderman’, Lord Mayor, knight but also about numbers and statistics.
“…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.’ (Act 1)
‘Well, it’s my duty to keep labour costs down, and if I’d agreed to this demand for a new rate we’d have added about twelve per cent to our labour costs.‘ (Act 1)
This is all said during a night which was originally to celebrate the union of two young people, a man and a woman who were in love with each other. A night to focus on love, family happiness, romance but Birling talks about twelve per cent to our labour costs‘, hardly romantic or emotionally-inspiring language.
Would a daughter really want a father like Birling, or at least a father behaving like that during a special night such as the one in the play to celebrate an engagement?
For Sheila this would be a night to engage in happiness, joyous conversation about her relationship with the man she loves and wants to spend the rest of her life with.
Birling instead speaks about ‘labour costs’
Birling does not talk about having grandchildren and how fun it would be to play with them but on the business aspect of the marriage.
Birling is competitive.
Capitalism is competitive.
Birling is about numbers, profits, labour costs and prioritises that above the human aspect, in this context the emotional connection between his daughter Sheila and Gerald Croft.
Capitalism is about numbers, profits, labour costs. Does it prioritise numbers and money above human beings and their feelings?
Is raw, absolute, unchecked capitalism somewhat inhuman, devoid of emotional feeling and compassion?
Maybe this is what Priestley wants us to either think, ask or explore?
Mr Birling, social mobility & social responsibility?
Mr Birling, is a capitalist, a wealthy businessman who makes money for himself and for the government as from the money he makes he pays the government taxes. We know that he has a ‘provincial accent’ and is clearly not from an aristocratic or ‘old money’ (a family which has been very wealthy for generations) family. So he has clearly progressed his way upwards. The ability to move from one social class up to a higher one is called ‘social mobility’. In the medieval era this was virtually impossible for most people. If one was born a serf or peasant working growing crops they would die as a serf.
However social mobility was made easier after the industrial revolution as sometimes what mattered was not your bloodline or your family lineage but how clever you were at making money by producing goods and doing business. For example Richard Arkwright the man who invented the water frame had a family who did not have enough money to send him to school but later on in life he became immensely wealthy and opened his own factories. Birling is similar to Richard Arkwright, but by lineage, something his ‘provincial’ accent clearly indicates he is not of ‘noble blood’ but he has worked his way upwards. However does Birling want to make a more equal society and help people from the working class from which he seems to have come from? Far from it. Quotes from Birling include:
‘man has to mind his own business and look after himself.’ (Act 1)
Priestley believes in the exact opposite of this and shows Birling as a foolish, stubborn and selfish man, an example of what is wrong with capitalism.
Birling is an ‘aspirational capitalist’ In his pursuit of money and status Birling has become so engrossed with his relentless struggle for greater and greater profits e.g. the Birlings and Crofts marrying in to each others families and making more profits for their business and becoming a knight, that he cares very little for the working class in society or helping them.
He has also married Sybil Birling whom Priestley calls his ‘social superior‘ once again indicating that he is maybe constantly trying to elevate himself higher and higher on the social ladder, including marrying someone from a higher social background.
What Priestley might be trying to highlight here is that even if people from wealthy backgrounds become financially successful they should not forget the rest of society including the poor and that ‘honour’ in the form of titles and status does not matter as much as the dishonour of contributing to a woman’s suicide.
That profits, titles, money and influence should never take priority over us helping our fellow human beings and being compassionate to them and their suffering.
Conclusion
There are other things that we can say about Mr Birling in addition to the fact that he is:
- capitalist
- competitive
- status conscious
- makes wildly foolish predictions and is arguably not that intelligent.
We can also see he is:
- stubborn
- old-fashioned and somewhat sexist
- lacks compassion, when dealing with the death of Eva Smith.
But Mr Birling in this play is personifying capitalism and the plutocracy. A plutocrat is someone super-rich who is very powerful, and a plutocracy means rule of the rich. The adjective is plutocratic.
Here are some more useful words when speaking about Mr Birling, some mentioned above.
Useful vocabulary for GCSE students in essays and exam questions.
- Dramatic irony – e.g. in the way Priestly shows Birling’s stupidity in saying WW1 would not happen.
- Capitalist – of capitalism, a system where rich businessmen control society and where society is governed for their interests. A capitalist is also a rich businessman like Mr Birling.
- Status-obsessed – To be very concerned or obsessed with your status in society, your reputation or your image e.g. “Mr Birling is clearly a status-obsessed individual who makes reference to a possible knighthood and being a former lord mayor”
- Status conscious – To be very conscious about your status.
- ‘nouveau riche’ – ‘New rich’, people who have become rich recently and often don’t know how to spend their money or dress ‘properly’ or lack taste or maybe very ostentatious in their very blatant display of money.
- Devoid– Birling at times may not be completely devoid of feelings or emotions but seems to care very little about the death of Eva Smith. When you are ‘devoid’ of feeling, it means you have no feeling or compassion for someone.
- Credibility – Birling has little credibility in the eyes of the audience as he makes very foolish and wrong predictions about there being no war or the Titanic not sinking.
- Competitive – Mr Birling is very competitive
- Inferiority complex – A feeling of not being good as others or not having their approval and working hard to get it. Birling arguably has an inferiority complex.
- Elusive – the adjective of the verb, ‘elude’ which means to miss something or not get it.
- Old-fashioned – Birling is an old-fashioned man stuck in his ways unlike the younger Birlings or Gerald.
Tell us what you think in the comments section below!
Thanks, this is a very rich and well-written analysis and explanation of Mr Birling and some of the issues in the play e.g. his possible ‘inferiority complex’. Would you say we could even see Mr Birling as some sort of victim to a degree?
Thank you for your compliment.
The issue of perpetrators of wrong being ‘victims’ can be taken to extreme levels and sometimes is. For example murderers are sometimes said to be victims of their upbringing or society. In this way we can say that Mr Birling is a victim of a system that emphasises status and social exclusivity with the rich and powerful being actively encouraged to keep a distance from the power and being discouraged from mixing with them.
However even at that time and before, many of the rich did engage in some sort of philanthropic activity to try and make society better including for those less well of, something which Mr Birling himself does not appear to be active in, though he is obviously a fictional character but nevertheless based on real life figures similar to him.