'An Inspector Calls': Sheila Character Analysis (animated)

[0:00]Priestly uses the character of Sheila to explore the power of the individual in a biased society and to challenge ideas about gender. In the opening moments of the play, Priestly presents Sheila as an immature, materialistic character. Despite the stage directions telling us that she is in her early twenties, Sheila refers to her parents as mommy and daddy, an infantile, immature mode of address which is reciprocated by Mr and Mrs. Berling. who refer to Sheila as both a child and childish. Sheila's comment about the engagement ring and how she will never let it go out of my sight presents her as materialistic. As does the comment from Eric that Sheila and Mrs. Burling are talking about clothes when they retired to the drawing room in Act one. We see numerous examples where Priestly presents other characters treating Sheila as inferior. Early in Act one, Gerald inquires of Sheila, I've been trying long enough, haven't I? But it is Mrs. Burling who interrupts and replies in Sheila's place, telling Gerald, of course she does. Later, Gerald tries to have Sheila removed from the room during his interrogation, telling the inspector in the opening of Act two, I think Miss Burling ought to be excused. Yes, it is clear early on that Sheila is not treated as an equal by anyone. At the time the play was set, women were treated as inferior to men. I mean, just take a quick look at Eric. He is undoubtedly more immature than Sheila, but he isn't treated like a child in the way she is. Sheila's treatment by others reflects how women were considered as having an inferior role within a male-dominated society. This attitude to women as inferior is, it can be argued, one of the causes of Eva Smith's death. Like Eva, Sheila is treated as inferior because of her gender, however, because she's middle class, she's more protected and less vulnerable than Eva Smith. After the inspector's interrogation, Sheila begins to change as a character. Her words to Gerald of, you fool, he knows, demonstrate a dramatic shift in her personality. The little girl who was cooing over a ring has gone, and her passivity has been replaced with a fiery indignation. The sarcastic, you're forgetting I'm supposed to be engaged to the hero cuts through Gerald's attempt to romanticize the story of his interactions with Eva. Furthermore, the maturity behind her cool returning of the ring, as opposed to her tantrum at the end of Gerald's confession, implies to the audience that this is a woman who is now not governed by her emotions, but by logic and reason. Priestly seems to be suggesting that the audience should aspire to be like Sheila. They should own the mistakes they've made and make others accountable for their own mistakes too. Priestly presents Sheila as a character who quickly learns the inspector's message of social responsibility. Unlike her parents, who when they think they've got away with it, laugh and encourage their children to do the same, complaining, they can't even take a joke. The contrast between Sheila and her parents can be interpreted as Priestly criticizing the behavior of the older generation who are fixed in their ways. To signify this change in Sheila's character, we see a shift in the terms of address she uses with her parents. In Act two, Sheila addresses Mrs. Burling as mother and Mr. Burling as father, a symbol of how she is matured from the childlike Act one address of mommy and daddy. Also in Act two, Sheila interrupts and answers a question directed at Mrs. Burling, telling the inspector, yes, she is. Why? when the inspector asks Mrs. Burling if she's a member of the Brumley Women's charity organization. This is a dramatic turn around from the start of the play where it was Mrs. Burling interrupting and answering for Sheila. The change in Sheila is dramatic and serves as an example to the audience of how they too can dramatically change for the better. With the inspector's final exit in Act three, Sheila can in some ways be seen to take on his role. We saw a hint of this at the end of Act one when it was Sheila who forced a confession out of Gerald whilst the inspector went off stage with Eric. Following the inspector's departure in the third act, Sheila interrogates her family and Gerald, asking a series of questions. Through this use of questioning, Priestly is showing how Sheila has taken on the interrogating role of the inspector. Priestly also uses repetition as a technique with Sheila mirroring the language used previously by the inspector when she talks about fire and blood and anguish, the exact words previously spoken by Inspector Gull. This mirroring of language is Priestly's way of showing us how Sheila has not only learned the inspector's valuable lesson, but has in some way taken on the role of the inspector himself. Yes, she realizes her own fault in the matter, but she also wants to ensure that others do too. Through his presentation of Sheila, Priestly encourages the audience to challenge conventional thinking and to question the behavior of others, holding those to account who have power over us, even if that means rejecting those who are close to us and rethinking our own worldviews. If Sheila can so dramatically transform from a selfish, shallow creature to one who now challenges others and cares about social responsibility, then everyone in the audience can also transform in the same way. Everything I go through in this video series can be found in the second updated edition of Mr. Brovsky to an inspector calls, and you can pick up a copy through following the links in the description. If you've found this video useful, please do give it a thumbs up and subscribe to the channel.