To really dislike An Inspector Calls?

[SheilaSybilCroft]

It’s been a GCSE text since the 1990s (and probably before.)

I really don’t like it. I hate the big fuss that is made out of eva smith being ‘pretty’ - as if it would be somehow acceptable to hound her out of jobs if she was plain and old!

She did lie to Mrs B: how was she supposed to know one story was true while another was a lie? And while attitudes to unmarried mothers have changed it’s ridiculous to pretend that someone in Eva’s position would have been met with sympathy and kindness if she’d just met a nicer sort of woman.

I know it’s an attack on the upper classes of the Edwardian period and the characters are representative rather than literal but the preachy tone and high handed sort of manner taken by the inspector is annoying.

And the film version the BBC did about ten years ago presents a saint like Eva and deviates from the text just enough to confuse students!

Or is it just me?

I think we're just bored with it. Overfamiliarity causes contempt. Same with Christmas Carol.

I like ACC, but revising it for exams in may always feels somewhat odd! It’s the moralistic tone of AIC. I love teaching Macbeth and have done so for over twenty years now but not AIC.

Personally, I studied it at a time when I was taking a critical look at the people around me.

I'll share.

My Godfather owned properties and I discovered at 15 that he didn't allow tenants on benefits. Despite seeing him as a guy who understood the plight of people with less, because he came from less, I was shocked to hear that he essentially agreed with the restrictions that meant if he did, it would cost him more money and fuss.

This was a guy who would criticise right wing political parties for taking from the poor and underfunding services, but wouldn't take steps to do what he could to help as he essentially agreed with their stereotypes.

I saw more people around me who talk the talk, and might even "walk the walk" professionally and/or publicly. But actually, in their personal lives and where it directly affects them, their "values" go out of the window..

I hated it at 14 because it was SO overblown in the “symbolism”. Zero nuance or subtlety in that sledgehammer.

I don't hate it, but I hate the fact our education systems means that the texts haven't changed since the 90s.

I think you've missed the point of the details you say you hate. And it's usually taught because it's accessible for teenagers to write about well.

It was the first proper play I saw as a teenager (on a school trip)and I was blown away. I’d been to musicals, pantomimes etc but not a plain old grown up play . I don’t remember much about what happened but it turned me on to plays and I’ve not looked back so will always think kindly of it for that

It's preachey and simplistic, perhaps revolutionary or shocking in its time, but not engaging as a drama today.

I’ve taught AIC for years. I find it a great way of examining social justice, class, expectations around women, abusive behaviours, equality … I could go on and on. We start with talking about poverty and challenging attitudes ( 14 year olds can be very judgmental ) and then Eva Smith puts a human face on that.

I’ve always found students like it (especially the ‘who is the inspector?’) and can write coherently and well. It’s a good vehicle for addressing lots of issues and the National Theatre production from years ago together with the ‘In context’ programme which e examines attitudes in 1945 are both good. That BBC adaptation needs to be burned - it shows Eva Smith when the whole point is she may not even exist.

I agree that the GCSE needs a lot of revision but I’d like an equally rich text to replace it.

I did it for my o levels in 1982!

I'm an English lit lecturer and I'll agree that it's less than subtle! But it's also a text that really encourages students to take a position on the issues within it and build an argument about its contents. What is it saying about the society that the characters belong to? Why is it important that it is an "inspector" who calls? It also has been staged in very particular symbolic ways that gives students things to say about performance. So it's a great text for demonstrating what the knowledges, skills and methods of English lit are. We're not just in the business of telling students what literature is "great" and why.

As I tell my students, sometimes texts you don't enjoy nevertheless give you lots to say about them. IAC is a great text for students to whom literary analysis doesn't come naturally, and there are ways that you can stretch talented students with it. It's a lasting exam text for those reasons.

It as boring when I read it & even more boring now.

Do they need to change? It's a different set of kids each year, none are repeating it

The Stephen Daldry theatre production was a revelation back in the day. Saw it a couple of times and was blown away both times. Different on the page of course, more of its time, but I still think it's a good play and worth studying. Haven't seen the screen version.

I loved it at school and love it still. Saw it at the Garrick years ago, absolutely amazing.

Also, on the idea of the inspector being "preachy" - it's a really good question as to whether his methods are effective. What changes for the characters, or for the audience? Is theatre an effective tool for individual and social change (the inspector himself is quite theatrical)? Some GCSE students won't consider those questions, but the best ones can.

I will say it, though I'm sure its very preachy, it was the only book of the GCSE syllabus that my dd liked.

She hated the poetry, Jekyll and Hyde , and Macbeth.

I hate the big fuss that is made out of eva smith being ‘pretty’ - as if it would be somehow acceptable to hound her out of jobs if she was plain and old!

You’ve very much missed the point here.

Teens generally respond well to this text - the super obvious links to social injustices mean that most kids can discuss and write well about it. I love having regular discussions about which character they dislike most, and why - it leads to real, emotional reflection about which is the worst bad thing in society.

I didn’t read it for GCSE or ALevel so my introduction was in the west end though can’t remember now what production. I could probably google. I liked it, but it wasn’t earth shattering. My opinion of it was along the same lines of what I did do in school (Death of a Salesman), so I don’t think it was because I was intellectually more complex older. I was a bright person at school and wouldn’t have considered it mindblowing. I think the point is that it’s easy to grasp for the average teen. The symbolism is heavy handed enough to give kids enough to hold on to and run with, but not too much as to be tedious.
It’s a difficult call.
There are so many great playwrights and plays out there that there is so much to explore. If it ignites in some a love for the theatre then that’s a good thing. If some never get into the theatre maybe they never would’ve anyway?

Same here but a couple of years before.
Quite liked it but have not gone back to re-read.

I get that, but what makes that better than any of the literature that has come after it? Why is our curriculum not dynamic?

Honestly, it is relatively recent BUT deals with issues that we like to see as archaic. Parents couldn't handle their kids learning about about books with more current issues because they're too entangled in their own feelings about such subject matter.

Pah! I did it for my o levels in 1976!

I didn’t mind it because it was at least understandable. Other texts we did were Macbeth and some tedious stuff by DH Lawrence. An Inspector Calls was a blessed relief after all that.

Sure it's the film with Alastair Sim that is the problem - that portrays the young woman when, as you say, the point is that she's an amalgam of all the working class people the Birlings have treated horribly rather than one individual

Gove brought in the 'British authors only for gsce' rule. So there is that.