"Attractive" and "well-bred", Priestley initially presents Gerald Croft as a respectable young man of great prospects.
However, through the interrogation of the Inspector, his facade breaks down and he embodies exploitative,
misogynistic Capitalist individuals of the Edwardian Era.
At the start of Act 1, Gerald is presented as possessive, but romantic in his relationship with Sheila. When he gives
Sheila her engagement ring, she exclaims "oh- Is it the one you wanted me to have?" Whilst the stage direction
"excited" and "oh" could convey exclamative joy for Gerald’s surprise, the punctuation "-" could suggest Sheila's
hesitation. The verb "wanted" in addition to the perhaps unnatural phrasing not only presents Gerald as possessive
and self-centred, but also points towards him dictating Sheila's choice under a patriarchal society, all of which
masked by a “pink and intimate” lighting. This could make us feel uneasy as we are made to confront the strict
patriarchy in the Edwardian Era which leaves Sheila, (and contemporary women) with little to no say in their
relationship, even having to put on a "half-serious, half-joking" tone when confronting Gerald's potential infidelity
for the sake of remaining a good prospect of marriage.
Also in Act one, Gerald first discloses his capitalist, classiest views by sympathising with Mr Birling's decision to "let
[Eva] go" by saying "You couldn't have done anything else". The word "anything" is definitive, suggesting the
certainty he holds on the necessity of sacrificing "cheap labour" for the greater "interest of capital", and to remain in
power. As the audience, we hear of this conversation straight after knowing of Eva's demise "in great agony" and
would find this particularly callous. Therefore, Priestley effectively criticises the lack of humanity in Capitalist
power-hungry individuals, where profit is perceived as the imperative priority and undermines Capitalism as an
impediment to Edwardian society. Additionally, Priestley also foreshadows that Gerald- as a member of the Upper
class- is the outlier of the younger generation through contrasting dialogues of Sheila and Eric with Mr Birling
(seen in Sheila arguing "They're people")
Towards the end of Act 1, and at the start of Act 2, the Inspector breaks the romanticised, "intimate" tone and
Gerald’s misogyny is revealed. After his futile attempts to dismiss Sheila’s questions by “trying to smile”, he asserts
his patriarchal dominance in their relationship through stating Sheila should be removed as “she’s obviously had as
much as she can stand” which suggests Gerald seeks to speak for Sheila and suppress her voice. Alternatively, his
denial to both the inspector and Sheila suggests his desire of self-preservation as he’d rather keep up his facade of
morality than aid a legal investigation. In addition, the phrase “as much as she can stand” connotes his belief that
Sheila is vulnerable and less enduring due to her gender. In that dialogue, Priestley uses a dictating anaphora “she’s”
However, through the interrogation of the Inspector, his facade breaks down and he embodies exploitative,
misogynistic Capitalist individuals of the Edwardian Era.
At the start of Act 1, Gerald is presented as possessive, but romantic in his relationship with Sheila. When he gives
Sheila her engagement ring, she exclaims "oh- Is it the one you wanted me to have?" Whilst the stage direction
"excited" and "oh" could convey exclamative joy for Gerald’s surprise, the punctuation "-" could suggest Sheila's
hesitation. The verb "wanted" in addition to the perhaps unnatural phrasing not only presents Gerald as possessive
and self-centred, but also points towards him dictating Sheila's choice under a patriarchal society, all of which
masked by a “pink and intimate” lighting. This could make us feel uneasy as we are made to confront the strict
patriarchy in the Edwardian Era which leaves Sheila, (and contemporary women) with little to no say in their
relationship, even having to put on a "half-serious, half-joking" tone when confronting Gerald's potential infidelity
for the sake of remaining a good prospect of marriage.
Also in Act one, Gerald first discloses his capitalist, classiest views by sympathising with Mr Birling's decision to "let
[Eva] go" by saying "You couldn't have done anything else". The word "anything" is definitive, suggesting the
certainty he holds on the necessity of sacrificing "cheap labour" for the greater "interest of capital", and to remain in
power. As the audience, we hear of this conversation straight after knowing of Eva's demise "in great agony" and
would find this particularly callous. Therefore, Priestley effectively criticises the lack of humanity in Capitalist
power-hungry individuals, where profit is perceived as the imperative priority and undermines Capitalism as an
impediment to Edwardian society. Additionally, Priestley also foreshadows that Gerald- as a member of the Upper
class- is the outlier of the younger generation through contrasting dialogues of Sheila and Eric with Mr Birling
(seen in Sheila arguing "They're people")
Towards the end of Act 1, and at the start of Act 2, the Inspector breaks the romanticised, "intimate" tone and
Gerald’s misogyny is revealed. After his futile attempts to dismiss Sheila’s questions by “trying to smile”, he asserts
his patriarchal dominance in their relationship through stating Sheila should be removed as “she’s obviously had as
much as she can stand” which suggests Gerald seeks to speak for Sheila and suppress her voice. Alternatively, his
denial to both the inspector and Sheila suggests his desire of self-preservation as he’d rather keep up his facade of
morality than aid a legal investigation. In addition, the phrase “as much as she can stand” connotes his belief that
Sheila is vulnerable and less enduring due to her gender. In that dialogue, Priestley uses a dictating anaphora “she’s”
