Sybil Birling, the middle-aged matriarch of the Birling family, is used by Priestley to represent the
hypocrisy, heartlessness and wilful ignorance of upper middle classes and the narrow-minded older
generation in Britain during the early twentieth century.
In her first appearance Priestley presents Mrs Birling as an affluent and upper-class woman, he uses
structure and form to give her a negative impression. This is shown through the stage directions at
the beginning of the play which describe the “dining room” and “large suburban house” which bring
about the notion of her being patronizing and controlling to those who are of lower classes than her
just like many other upper middle class people would have been in 1912 as the class system was a
prominent aspect of life and defined it. The fact that the audience learn of these specific
characteristics of Mrs Birling first suggest the significance of wealth in her privileged life, which
shows her in a negative light as it suggests that she is materialistic and greedy. This idea is further
enforced when she is described as a “rather cold woman”. The adjective “cold” metaphorically
implies that she has no affection or emotions towards those who are less fortunate. As she is a
middle aged woman it suggests that the older generation are narrow-minded and reluctant to
change the social hierarchy. The audience is also told that she is her “husband’s social superior”
where the noun “superior” clearly outlines her position in society and that she is above others and
perhaps suggests the growing gap capitalism has created. As Priestley was an avid Labour supporter
he portrays the character of Mrs Birling-who is a Conservatives- in a negative light. Therefore
Priestley presents Mrs Birling as a typical upper middle class citizen in 1912.
Mrs Birling is presented to be a dominant and arrogant character. She boldly declares to Edna that
they’ll “ring… when [they] want coffee”. The adverbial phrase “when we want coffee” powerfully
conveys her controlling nature to the audience. This is further conveyed when she attempts to
control her entire family using exclamatory remarks such as “Arthur!” and “Eric?!”, the use of
punctuation such as exclamation marks and question marks could show that she is trying to
dominate everyone. This conveys her superiority, confidence and self-assurance which proves that
she is a symbol of “Pride” in the seven deadly sins which once again gives her a negative impression
to show the idea that Capitalists are just greedy and vein people as Priestley wanted to promote
Socialism.
Priestley also presents Mrs Birling as being ignorant towards those of a lower class than her. Her
cruel treatment of Eva Smith shows her myopic view of the world, which prevents her from
understanding that Eva visited her charity out of desperation. This is portrayed through her use of
euphemisms such as “a girl of that sort” and “a girl in her position” where she objectifies Eva and as
a result women in the working class which further reinforces the idea of the older generation being
narrow-minded as she immediately assumes that Eva is lying for money thus being ignorant to only
those in working class. In addition to this the harsh determiner “that” gives a sense of disdain and
disgust thus implying that Mrs Birling believes that the working class are inferior to her and
therefore conveys the notion of the upper and middle classes looking down upon the working class.
It also creates a sense of detachment thus creating a disparity between the classes. Priestley
believed that with the means of production being owned by businessmen, the relationship between
employer and workforce became impersonal and uncaring. They become ‘cheap labour’, not people.
Therefore it became easier for the upper classes to stereotype the working classes as separate,
amorphous and undeserving. This led to a ‘them and us’ attitude and a social divide which can be
seen through Mrs Birling’s harsh words. This is further reinforced when she tries to build up a “wall”
which could serve as a metaphor of a barrier that separates the classes. Mrs Birling dismisses the
fact that she may have played a roles in her daughter-in-law and grandchild’s death. She concludes
that she is “sorry that [Eva Smith] came to such a horrible end. But [she accepts] no blame for it all.”
Priestley uses contrasting effects whereas first she suggests guilt and grief but then refuses to take
hypocrisy, heartlessness and wilful ignorance of upper middle classes and the narrow-minded older
generation in Britain during the early twentieth century.
In her first appearance Priestley presents Mrs Birling as an affluent and upper-class woman, he uses
structure and form to give her a negative impression. This is shown through the stage directions at
the beginning of the play which describe the “dining room” and “large suburban house” which bring
about the notion of her being patronizing and controlling to those who are of lower classes than her
just like many other upper middle class people would have been in 1912 as the class system was a
prominent aspect of life and defined it. The fact that the audience learn of these specific
characteristics of Mrs Birling first suggest the significance of wealth in her privileged life, which
shows her in a negative light as it suggests that she is materialistic and greedy. This idea is further
enforced when she is described as a “rather cold woman”. The adjective “cold” metaphorically
implies that she has no affection or emotions towards those who are less fortunate. As she is a
middle aged woman it suggests that the older generation are narrow-minded and reluctant to
change the social hierarchy. The audience is also told that she is her “husband’s social superior”
where the noun “superior” clearly outlines her position in society and that she is above others and
perhaps suggests the growing gap capitalism has created. As Priestley was an avid Labour supporter
he portrays the character of Mrs Birling-who is a Conservatives- in a negative light. Therefore
Priestley presents Mrs Birling as a typical upper middle class citizen in 1912.
Mrs Birling is presented to be a dominant and arrogant character. She boldly declares to Edna that
they’ll “ring… when [they] want coffee”. The adverbial phrase “when we want coffee” powerfully
conveys her controlling nature to the audience. This is further conveyed when she attempts to
control her entire family using exclamatory remarks such as “Arthur!” and “Eric?!”, the use of
punctuation such as exclamation marks and question marks could show that she is trying to
dominate everyone. This conveys her superiority, confidence and self-assurance which proves that
she is a symbol of “Pride” in the seven deadly sins which once again gives her a negative impression
to show the idea that Capitalists are just greedy and vein people as Priestley wanted to promote
Socialism.
Priestley also presents Mrs Birling as being ignorant towards those of a lower class than her. Her
cruel treatment of Eva Smith shows her myopic view of the world, which prevents her from
understanding that Eva visited her charity out of desperation. This is portrayed through her use of
euphemisms such as “a girl of that sort” and “a girl in her position” where she objectifies Eva and as
a result women in the working class which further reinforces the idea of the older generation being
narrow-minded as she immediately assumes that Eva is lying for money thus being ignorant to only
those in working class. In addition to this the harsh determiner “that” gives a sense of disdain and
disgust thus implying that Mrs Birling believes that the working class are inferior to her and
therefore conveys the notion of the upper and middle classes looking down upon the working class.
It also creates a sense of detachment thus creating a disparity between the classes. Priestley
believed that with the means of production being owned by businessmen, the relationship between
employer and workforce became impersonal and uncaring. They become ‘cheap labour’, not people.
Therefore it became easier for the upper classes to stereotype the working classes as separate,
amorphous and undeserving. This led to a ‘them and us’ attitude and a social divide which can be
seen through Mrs Birling’s harsh words. This is further reinforced when she tries to build up a “wall”
which could serve as a metaphor of a barrier that separates the classes. Mrs Birling dismisses the
fact that she may have played a roles in her daughter-in-law and grandchild’s death. She concludes
that she is “sorry that [Eva Smith] came to such a horrible end. But [she accepts] no blame for it all.”
Priestley uses contrasting effects whereas first she suggests guilt and grief but then refuses to take
