Download our SSCE Study Guide Bundle
Compare and contrast the characters of Arthur Birling and Eric Birling in An Inspector Calls.
The most significant difference between Arthur Birling and Eric Birling in Inspector Calls lies in their worldviews, which represent the clash between the older capitalist generation and the younger, more socially conscious generation.
Mr. Birling is depicted as a “hard-headed, practical man of business” who believes strictly in individualism. He explicitly lectures Eric and Gerald that community is nonsense and that “a man has to make his own way—has to look after himself.” He views his workers not as people but as a means to keep labour costs down, feeling no regret for firing Eva Smith for asking for a raise. Eric, on the other hand, instinctively challenges his father’s capitalist views. When he hears why his father fired Eva, he asks, “Why shouldn’t they try for higher wages? We try for the highest possible prices.” Unlike his father, who prioritises the company’s profits, Eric sees the workers’ right to a decent life.
Besides, the two characters react in opposing ways to the inspector’s investigation and the revelation of their involvement in the girl’s death. His primary concern is his social standing and the avoidance of a “public scandal” that might threaten his potential knighthood. He refuses to accept responsibility, insisting, “I only did what an employer might have done”. When it appears the inspector was a hoax, Birling is immensely relieved and ready to revert to business as usual, mocking the “famous younger generation” for taking it seriously. Eric, on the other hand, is deeply shaken by his actions. He admits, “I’m not likely to forget.” Unlike his father, Eric realises that the technical reality of the inspector (whether he was a real police officer or not) does not change the moral reality of what they did. He is ashamed of his parents for their inability to admit their guilt.
While both men used their power over Eva Smith, the nature of their exploitation differs. As for Mr. Birling, his relationship was purely economic and distant. He used his power as an employer to cut off her livelihood to protect his profits. Conversely, Eric Birling’s relationship was personal and sexual. He used his physical strength and social status to force himself on her when he was drunk, treating her, as the inspector says, “as if she was an animal, a thing, not a person.” However, unlike his father, Eric did attempt to help her afterwards (albeit with stolen money) and expressed genuine distress at her fate.
Beyond their differences, father and son share some key traits. One, both men utilised their social and economic advantages to exploit a vulnerable working-class woman. Birling used his authority to fire her; Eric used his money and status to use her for a “stupid drunken evening.”
There is a distinct lack of understanding between them. Birling regards Eric as a “hysterical young fool” and tells him he has a lot to learn. Conversely, Eric admits that Birling is “not the kind of father a chap could go to when he’s in trouble.”
Both eventually admit the factual details of their actions to the inspector, though their emotional responses to these facts are polar opposites. Birling admits he discharged her, and Eric admits he got her pregnant and stole money.
Receive Literary Updates through our Social Media Channels:
- WhatsApp: Literature PADI or Literature-in-English with LP
- Telegram: Literature PADI
- YouTube: @literaturepadi
- Facebook: Literature PADI
