Modern Drama Mark Scheme and Model Answers (Edexcel IGCSE English Literature)

 How does Priestley present Mrs Sybil Birling in the play?

 You must consider language, form and structure in your answer.

Throughout the play, Priestley presents Sybil Birling as a deeply flawed and prejudiced character. She is first presented as “a rather cold woman who has a strong set of beliefs about people’s social status. The stage directions are indicative of her status and reputation within society: “her husband’s social superior”. Priestley depicts Mrs Birling as a symbol of the privileges of the upper classes and their selfish, prejudiced conduct. Like her husband, she is conscious of her high social position, however, she is more arrogant, dismissive and socially prejudiced than him. Early in the play, she is depicted as being overly concerned about keeping up appearances and maintaining social etiquette. For example, she reprimands Mr Birling for paying compliments to the cook: “(reproachfully) Arthur, you're not supposed to say such things”. Due to her elevated social position, she views the working classes as morally inferior and displays a dismissive and patronising view of lower-class women, referring to them as girls “of that class”. As a “prominent member of the Brumley Women's Charity Organisation”, she should be supportive of women such as Eva but her role represents a symbol of her status, not her concern for other. Furthermore, she rejects Eva for the trivial reason of her using the Birling name to introduce herself to the charity: “She was giving herself ridiculous airs” and deems it “simply absurd in a girl in her position”. She is unashamed of the prejudice she holds against Eva and thus is morally hypocritical, claiming that she has “done a great deal of useful work for deserving cases”. Her dialogue further reveals her snobbery as she refuses to use Eva’s name and refers to her only as a “girl”, demeaning and infantilising her. 

Eddie (talking about Rodolpho): ‘He – he’s just a kid, that’s all’.

 How far do you agree with the view that Rodolpho is presented as immature in the play?

 You must consider language, form and structure in your answer

Miller initially presents Rodolpho as an immature character by contrasting his actions with other characters’ behaviour in the play. When Rodolpho and Marco are first introduced, Miller contrasts their levels of maturity, with Marco introducing his younger brother to the family: “indicating Rodolpho: ‘My brother. Rodolpho’”. Rodolpho is also depicted as lacking maturity in his boastful, exaggerated comments about his charmed life in Italy: “Back in Italy, I was known for my charm. Women couldn’t resist me” and “I cook, I sing, I could even do some hairdressing”. Furthermore, he seems careless about attracting attention in America; as an illegal immigrant he faces the prospect of being deported if he is caught. Marco also alludes to Rodolpho’s immaturity, by describing him as a free spirit, with the use of repetition underlining his idealism as if he hasn’t fully matured: “he dreams, he dreams”. Through Rodolpho’s use of hyperbolic language, his youthful innocence and naivety can also be perceived as childlike. For example, his fascination with American culture and his dreams of becoming a singer symbolise both his idealism and romanticism. He also displays an intense sense of wonder when describing Broadway: “where theatres are and the opera”. While his aspirations reflect a desire to escape the hardships of his past, it could also illustrate his naivety and his inability to confront the harsh realities of being an immigrant in a new country. This is also echoed in his behaviour as he is frivolous with his money, much to Eddie’s annoyance, as he believes Rodolpho should be more adult-like and responsible and save his money instead. Furthermore, in Act 2, Catherine’s intervention could allude to Rodolpho’s perceived lack of physical and mental maturity in dealing with such conflict. In an attempt to protect Rodolpho, Catherine screams at Eddie to stop him hurting Rodolpho: “Eddie! Let go, ya hear me! I’ll kill you! Leggo of him!” and “Don’t say nothin’ about him [Rodolpho]”. Catherine’s exclamatory language and use of imperatives could suggest that she perceives Rodolpho as more vulnerable and therefore she perhaps feels she must assert a maternal authority in order to protect him.

‘Eric is portrayed as a weak character in An Inspector Calls.’

 How far do you agree with this statement?

 You must consider language, form and structure in your answer.

Priestley presents Eric as a weak character from the outset of the play, but as the play progresses, Eric demonstrates a growing maturity and strength. By the end of the play, he demonstrates his willingness to change, reflecting his inner strength and moral conscience.

 At the beginning of the play, Eric is portrayed as a weak, naïve and shallow character. In the opening stage directions, he is described as “in his early twenties, not quite at ease, half shy, half assertive”. Priestley’s description denotes Eric’s lack of confidence and social awkwardness and he is in stark contrast to the other characters on stage, particularly his domineering father and the self-assured Gerald Croft. He is presented as an uncommendable, slightly drunk and uncomfortable character and Priestley’s stage directions presents him as something of a buffoon, socially awkward and out of place at a family celebration: “Eric suddenly guffaws”. One of Eric's weaknesses also appears to be alcohol and Gerald points out: “I have heard that he drinks pretty hard”. This could be regarded as a lack of self-control but also more tellingly also suggests a vulnerability in his character. [AO2]

 Despite his initial appearance of weakness, the subtle evolution of Eric’s character in the play is revealed by Priestley through his complex relationship with his parents. Although Mr and Mrs Birling treat Eric like a child, Eric attempts to challenge some of his parents’ views in the early stages of the play, as he contradicts them on many occasions in Act I. When he learns of the reasons why his father sacked Eva, he questions the social injustice of the decision: “Why shouldn't they try for higher wages?” While this arguably hints at a greater strength of character (and reveals his sympathy towards the strikers in his father’s factory), his retorts to his parents may simply be due to his hostility towards them. Ultimately, his initial weakness means he struggles to confront them to any great extent at this point in the play and they are largely dismissive of any opinions he puts forward. However, this initial feebleness could be interpreted as a result of societal pressures and his strained relationship with his parents, rather than an inherent flaw in his character. Interestingly, Priestley also deliberately gives Eric’s character an insignificant role in the first two acts of the play, enabling the other characters in the play to dominate events. [AO1]

 While an audience may view Eric as a more sympathetic character due to his initial weakness and vulnerabilities, his treatment of Eva reveals how he also dominated and exploited her. He is the last character to be questioned by the Inspector, allowing Priestley to build the dramatic tension of the play. The audience learn of Eric’s involvement with Eva: her pregnancy, Eric's theft of money and finally, Eric's explosive outburst when he learns of his mother's involvement and refusal to help Eva. He hints at the potential for sexual violence during his confession at the beginning of Act 3 and reveals Eva did not want him to enter her room until he became “nasty” and issued a threat: “I was in that state when a chap easily turns nasty”. Eric's language also makes him appear shallow, callous and superficial when he describes Eva as a “good sport” and his upper-class register identifies him as a privileged young man who can exploit those who are weaker than him. [AO1] Despite the audience’s ambivalence towards his character at this point, Priestley begins to reveal a change in his character in this act as he explains that he tried to take some responsibility for his actions by offering to marry Eva. Furthermore, his attempts to support her financially by requesting a pay rise from his father and his subsequent theft from the firm, motivated by a desire to help her, could be interpreted as evidence of his growing strength and maturity as a character. [AO1]

 As Act 3 progresses, Priestley depicts Eric as a much more assertive character. Eric’s dialogue reveals that he is ashamed and regretful of his conduct. During his confession he becomes increasingly rebellious and assertive towards his parents and his language is highly emotional: “you killed them both – damn you, damn you” and “I'm ashamed of you”. He heavily criticises his mother’s treatment of Eva Smith and it could be argued that Eric's strength lies in his growing social conscience and moral awareness. While his parents and Gerald Croft rejoice in having discovered the Inspector was a fraud, in contrast, both Eric and Sheila are at pains to focus on the lessons that they all must now learn, regardless of whether the Inspector was real. Eric demonstrates his strength and maturity here and begins to realise that things need to change in both his family and society when he is forced to face his guilt over Eva’s pregnancy and her subsequent death.

 Priestley initially presents Eric Birling as a weak character as evidenced by his unconfident manner, impulsive behaviour and dependency on alcohol. Despite this initial portrayal, Eric develops as the play progresses and despite his initial mistakes, he demonstrates a capacity for growth and change and challenges his family regarding their hypocrisy, illustrating a greater strength of character.