The Catcher in the Rye (Part II) – DEAR Entry

Over the past two weeks, I have been reading J.D. Salinger’s renowned coming-of-age novel, The Catcher in the Rye. The novel recounts the protagonist, Holden Caulfield’s transition into adulthood, which simultaneously symbolises childhood. Even though Holden may seem like the iconic rebel, the specific way he behaves is highly impacted by the heartrending death of his younger brother, Allie. Beneath the surface of this rebellious, depressed, phony adolescent lies a teenager who simply wishes to be the “catcher in the rye” – the man who saves children from falling over the cliff in the rye.

“She was right, though. It is ‘If a body meet a body coming through the rye.’ I didn’t know it then, though. ‘I thought it was ‘If a body catch a body,’ I said. ‘Anyway, I keep picturing all these little kids playing some game in this big field of rye and all. Thousands of little kids, and nobody’s around–nobody big, I mean–except me. And I’m standing on the edge of some crazy cliff. What I have to do, I have to catch everybody if they start to go over the cliff–I mean if they’re running and they don’t look where they’re going. I have to come out from somewhere and catch them. That’s all I’d do all day. I’d just be the catcher in the rye and all. I know it’s crazy, but that’s the only thing I’d really like to be’” (pages 224-225).

Salinger sagely sums up the novel’s theme through naming the book The Catcher in the Rye. Holden is not simply saving the children from falling over the cliff, but saving them from falling into the dangers of adolescence and adulthood – which he has personally experienced. Overall, I enjoyed reading the novel, since the portrayals of characters make them seem real and relatable, without employing any sophisticated or fancy diction. I would recommend this book to almost anyone, as it is a nice read that provokes thoughts after you have read it.

1 person likes this post.

An Inspector Calls: Essay Reflection

1. After writing the essay, I’ve learned that I understand the play with some sufficient understanding, just enough to provide a modest account of the events of the play but not nearly enough to fully acknowledge each part. If I were to put a numerical figure on the number of times I’d need to re-read An Inspector Calls to fully understand the play, it would have to at least two or three times.

2. If I were to choose another question, namely the first, I believe that I would do significantly better, as something so abstract as unrealism and realism is hard to put into words, unlike the change of Birling’s fluctuating power. The would most likely result in a better grade for me.

3. I’d say I used my plan to some effect, although the actual planning of my essay could use improvements. My plan was very minimalistic, as all I really had was the assertion and supporting evidence that I rarely referred back to. I think for further planning, I should develop my plan and refer back to it more often than naught.

4. When I was writing, I didn’t really have any strategy other than following the basic paragraph structure. Even so, I feel like I lost focus about three or four times while writing the essay, and got carried away by my thoughts, which is in retrospect, exactly why I made my plan. Improving on my essay composition would be key, as I need a much more efficient method of approach and significantly reduce the time taken to write the essay by simply referring back to my plan and cutting down on useless points.

5. For starters, I re-read the essay twice to check for errors, and then started the backwards reading editing technique. I believe it would’ve been quite effective, if time were not of a major concern, so I think there are a lot of mistakes to be found in the essay. I believe my strategy is decent, and doesn’t need much improving, other than making sure my tenses are the same.

6. The most important experience would be to read the questions more carefully. I chose a question that I found particularly hard to write about, yet wrote about anyway. Halfway through the essay I looked back on the three questions and found a much easier one. Aside from that, planning, or lack thereof. I definitely need to plan more and utilize the plan to a much greater effect and efficiency than I previously did.

Be the first to like.

DEAR: Ender’s Game (April 1st)

Ender’s Game would have to be one of the first books I’ve read after I’ve seen the movie, and I have to say, it ruined my experience with Orson Scott Cards novel. To be frank, the movie was bad, plain and simple, and I couldn’t get the images of the movie out of my head, especially the main character Ender being incredibly overpowered. Yet however garbage the movie may have been, Ender’s Game still proved to be an enjoyable read, detailing the many hardships and traumas of war, PTSD, tactics, and the best of all, politics.

Aliens exist in poor Andrew Ender Wiggin’s world, and he, along with the rest of the humans, live in fear. To combat the vile creatures, Earth has decided to monitor young children and train them in space on the Battle School. Ender is one of them, but what sets him apart is his prodigious and genius ability’s both as a student and tactician. Problems pop up every so often and are swiftly dealt with by Ender’s cunning intellect and sometimes strength, until all is set to tackle his greatest challenge yet; the Formics.

As I’ve said, I didn’t come the like this book all too much, but would definitely recommend it too all who haven’t seen the movie. Alone, it stands as a stellar novel that addresses war at its worst, but with the movie, it dilutes what is a good and solid, long lasting novel to just a simple companion piece.

Be the first to like.

Reflection on practice essay

1. As I have read the play ‘An inspector calls’ several times, I have acknowledged the essence of the type of style and the characters that Author Pristley has chosen, and also a different realization and explorations might suddenly come to mind. I’ve also understood in depth about the confidence of Mr. Birling in contrast to Inspector Gooles. On that part of the play I have a relatively good tolerant and judgments. The more you read the play, the more clear you understandings of the characters, plot and background of the story will be.
2. If I have chosen one of the other questions, instead of the one I did, my essay would be worse, because I am more familiar with the concept of the question that I answered.
3. I planned the essay inside my head, but it didn’t become organized as I thought it would. I did include some thoughts about supporting the evidence but I might have gone off topic at some point. While I wrote the essay, I kept referring back to my thoughts and ideas to improve the structure, so I was certain what to write next. For future essays that I will write, I will need to write my plan up so I won’t disregard what to write at what stage.
4. Once I began composing the essay, I followed the structure of my plan. Beginning with a topic sentence which included my main point or idea. Then I began to expand the idea into different thoughts of my own, I’ve also supported my evidence with some quotes I remembered from the play. I was mostly focused on sentence structure and phrasing in the body paragraphs. I was distracted on thinking about the play way too much, and that has wasted my time mostly.
5. when I was editing my essay, I proofread it. When I came across a simple sentence or a particularly incorrect sentence, I tried to correct them as profound as possible. Also some spelling mistake were corrected as well as some grammar errors in the essay. Next time I will try my best to think before I write anything, that way I reread my thoughts and it strikes out some mistakes that were made in the sentence. I always try to squeeze out some time for editing the essay to improve my writing.
6. the most crucial thing I gained from this practice essay experience is I’ve always thought my knowledge to the play was profound, but in reality when I actually move my hands to write about it its extremely little. The other questions that I didn’t pick out to answer was because I couldn’t think of anything about them, and the supporting evidence was quite small to back up those main points and ideas.

Be the first to like.

The maze runner – DEAR ENTRY

Recently I’ve started reading “The Maze Runner”. This is a book about a boy, Thomas, who is the newest Newbie that has entered the Glade which was only filled with boys. Glade. Is an area protected by gigantic walls that only open at sunrise and shut at sunset, there is only one door for the runners to leave and investigate the patterns of the maze, and it is their job to draw maps everyday. Sometimes they don’t make it before the doors close, and get taken by Grievers out inside the maze. Thomas is about sixteen years old and has no memory from his past life, only a few flash backs here and there, the only vital information he knows clearly about himself is his name. Everything was normal until Thomas arrived, then the next day a girl arrives with coma. The first girl ever. And the message she delivers is terrifying.

These two quotes are my favorite, because it provokes the intensity and the changes in life that will happen to these people. The letter she brought was right, things did start to change.


Things are going to change

1 person likes this post.

Reflection on Practice Essay

1) From writing the essay, I learnt that my knowledge of the play only extends to an extent, likewise my understanding. There are deeper concepts and knowledge that I have yet to grasp. When composing the essay, I found myself more familiarised with some sections in Act I than in Act III. I believe the number of times required to re-read the play until one grasps a masterful understanding is indefinite, since every time you re-read it, different realisations and explorations might suddenly come struck you, or that you might view the same incident differently. However, in my opinion, several times must be read to ensure a clear understanding of the characters, plot, background and other aspects of the play.

2) If I were to choose another question, I believe my essay would be slightly worse. The question I chose to write about was the one that I was the most familiar with, which I found it undemanding to obtain evidence that backed up my assertions from the play.

3) Before writing the essay, I did compose a plan that outlined my main points. Making the plan aided me in organising my thoughts, since I jotted down the supporting evidence in the order of how I planned to write them. While writing the essay, I referred back to my plan several times to ensure that I included all of the points and that I was following my planned structure. I found it extremely helpful to refer back to the plan, since that way, I was certain of what to write next. In the future, I can improve my planning process by arranging it according to the order of paragraphs rather than assertions, which can provide a better outline for my essay.

4) Once I commenced composing the essay, I followed the structure of my plan. I began with a topic sentence and thesis statement, which included my major assertion. Then I began composing the body paragraphs, which consisted of topic sentences, assertions, supporting evidence, and conclusions. I produced the essay in this order since I found it easier to follow the structure of my plan. While composing, I focused the most on the supporting evidence and utilising it to reinforce my assertions. However, at intervals, I was slightly distracted by the polishing of sentence phrasing and diction employed. I will need to improve my success in the composing process by including transitions between various concepts and paragraphs, which would improve the overall structure of the essay.

5) When I was editing my essay, I proofread it and when I came across sentences that didn’t look particularly right, I would try to figure out the flaws and correct them. Although I don’t have a particular strategy for editing and proofreading an essay, I am willing to try out the various strategies that were introduced to us previously during class. In the future, I should ensure that there is sufficient time left to proofread and correct my essays, especially under time constraints.

6) The most prominent thing I gained from this experience is probably how little my knowledge of the play was. The major reason why I didn’t choose to write about the other questions was because I found it more difficult to pick out supporting evidence and to back up those points. I believe this is crucial, since in order to fully analyse the play, a thorough knowledge of all aspects must first be acquired.

Be the first to like.

Reflection on practice essay

1.From writing the practice essay on thursday I released that my understanding of the play is not as high as i would like it to be, during my planning time i struggled a bit to think of ideas and points but I eventually got them.I would think that it would be good if a re-read it a couple more times to fully understand all aspects of the play, this will most probably then benefit me when we write another essay.

2.If I was to  choose a different question when i wrote the essay I believe it wouldn’t be as strong. I think this because when I was preparing the questions I mainly focused on the first one which is the one I wrote about.From doing this I had more ideas and a better understanding on the first question.

3.During my planning time I am pretty sure I used it well.When I was planning i had wrote out all of my points and ideas.I had also wrote all my Assertions before I started writing the essay.While I was writing my essay I had also referred back to my points to make sure i was staying on track and wasn’t writing just to make my essay longer

4.When I was composing my essay my strategy was to write one paragraph at a time and after i finished each one proofread it before going onto the next one.I think this strategy helped because it meant that there was less simple mistakes to fix once I had finished my whole essay.While i was writing it i had wrote a introduction,conclusions and three body paragraphs.I had mainly focused on the body paragraphs because that was the part of the essay where i would get my points across.I mainly used my conclusion and introduction to summarize what i was going to write about and my main points.To improve my essay I think that i would be good if i had planned some stronger points to write about in my essay

5.My strategy for proofreading was that I would read each paragraph once when i had finished writing and also re-read my essay a couple times once I was finished with it. I think that my editing phase was very strong and that i did better at editing that planning and composing the essay.I think to possibly improve my proofreading skills i would be better if i was a bit faster at doing this, this way i would be able to spend more time on my less strong parts such as composing and planning.

6.From writing this essay i think the most important i will bring back is that i may need to practice writing some more thesis because I believe that this is my weakest part.I believe that i should also try to pay attention to the small detail and points which are in plays or stories like ‘inspector calls’ to give my a different angle of seeing it and making my essay unique compared to other writers.

Be the first to like.

Reflection on the practice essay- An Inspector Calls

After writing the practice essay, I felt that there are much more things that I need to know and understand about (in the play). I do know the superficial parts of the play (EG the characters and their functions), but not the deeper ones. I understand the characters more than the setting of the play.

I do not regret choosing the question that I did yesterday (Question 1). Comparing to Questions 2 and 3, I found it easier to write. To me, Arthur Birling is the simplest to write about. There are many supporting evidences as well as characteristics that we can include in our essays.

I didn’t exactly plan out my essay. There wasn’t enough time for me to actually pen down my thoughts etc. I had all my points that I wanted to talk about in my mind and from there I developed my ideas. I couldn’t remember the exact quotes I wanted to use so I briefly wrote about them. In the future, I believe I should manage my time well and leave some time for planning.

I started off introducing the Arthur Birling and after that proceeded with the body. I followed the sequence of the questions. I wrote about Arthur Birling’s confidence and power at the start of the play, followed by the undercutting, then the fluctuation in Act III. At the end, I linked back to the essay supporting my stand. I focused on mainly the body, particularly the thoughts and explanation of his personality and downfall. I was a little distracted as I elaborated on the points. As said earlier, I need to plan out my writing so that I will not face this problem again.

I didn’t have enough time to check on my work. I just scanned through the essay to check for grammatical and spelling errors. If I had more time, I would probably have added in more details to further support my evidences. I should allocate 5 minutes to check my work before submission.

I guess the most important thing is to plan out everything before we actually start on the essay. At least there is a structure that we can follow so we will not be stuck when writing the essay.

Be the first to like.

Reflection on my practice essay: An Inspector Calls

1. As I started planning the essay within the space given, I thought that it was going to be a extremely easy essay to write as I thought I knew the play quite well. However, once I started writing, it realised that I didn’t know the play as well as I thought I did. I figured that I knew the story line very well, but not the little details within the play. I wasn’t able to quote the play, which I think made me lose some marks as I wrote down roughly what I thought they had said. I was able to express more knowledge about the inspector seeing as I had been the inspector whilst we read through the play. In my opinion, I would have to read the play many more times in order to understand the play more throughly. However, I would never be able to understand the play fully as there would always be more thoughts and questions to be asked.

2. If I had chosen a different question to the one I did, my essay would be tremendously worst. I did not understand the other questions at all, hence if I was to write on it, I wouldn’t be able to put as much knowledge and would have only thoughts without evidence to back it up.

3. I think my plan was very simple because I wasn’t exactly sure what I wanted to write about. However with an hour as the time limit, I couldn’t waste time thinking about it, hence, I jumped straight into the essay without giving much thought on what I wanted to wright about. I only included rough details, much like an overview of what what I wanted in each paragraph.

I did not end up following my plan since I realised half way through that I had too much I wanted to write about. But as a result of not following the structure, I know for a fact that i went off topic a lot. I also happened to add an extra paragraph that was unplanned for since I realised at the end that I had missed out the last part of the question. I didn’t write about how all the changed would have effected the audience. Thus, at the end I had to add an extra paragraph that would be clear to the examiner that it wasn’t planned for.

In the future, I would make sure I include more detail in my plan and make sure my plan covers all the topics needed and all my ideas. This would prevent me going off topic and also make sure that I covered the question asked in the best way possible.

4. As I started writing, I did what I was most familiar with. I started off with an introduction that gave a bit of background of the play and a preview of the essay, then when I got to the body paragraphs, the paragraph was based on each act. Hence the first paragraph was based on act 1, second was based on act 2 and the third was based on act 3. I then added an unexpected paragraph due to poor planning and understanding of the question. One of my english teacher from before told us that there should never be any new information in the conclusion of the essay, which it what drove me to write an extra body paragraph.

I think I was focused on how Birling acted about Shelia’s engagement. Also I compared Birling to his two more modest kids a lot throughout the play a lot. However, as mentioned earlier, I got off topic a lot. I believe that I would loose a lot of marks due to that factor.

5. After finishing the essay, I quickly read through the finished piece. I was a able to correct many unnecessary mistakes. But I didn’t have time to read through the entire essay. Thus, in the future I would time myself better and hopefully leave more room for proofreading since it is one of the most important aspects of writing an essay.

6. Through this practice essay, I learned that I need to reread An Inspector Calls again to understand the play more throughly and also time myself better, which means, I need to be able to plan each paragraph better to avoid useless information and be able to have time at the end to proofread my work.

In my opinion, working on my planning is the most important because I get off topic a lot which would make me lose a lot of marks if it was an actual exam. Also if I was able to plan better, I would not leave of details that would force me to add a completely new out of place paragraph just to make sure I covered the point.

Be the first to like.

Reflection on Practice Essay

I found out my knowledge and understanding of the play increased as we discussed questions about it in class and wrote about it in class since I had to carefully think about the details of play. The first time I read the play, I did not completely understand it because of some of the vocabularies and the little hints of gestures that meant a great deal. I still do not know the play inside-out but I think I would if I read it several more times. For example maybe around 5 times. I realised that I understood some parts more than others. For example, I did not get Birling’s intentions and pride in the beginning.

I believe that my plan was not as accurate as it could be. I decided to change some details halfway through writing my essay. But it still helped my essay to be more organised and clear to the point. As I wrote the plan, I used some supporting evidence in the play. It was the not the exact words but it was an overall idea of it. For instance, I used how Birling complimented the food as an supporting evidence. While writing the essay I referred back to my plan because it was clear of what I wanted to write about. In the future, I could improve my plan by actually write the points in the order that I would write about in the essay. Also, add the introduction and conclusion.

As I wrote my points in the essay as the order of the questions asked. I thought this would be easier for the reader to read if they saw the questions. I guess I focused more on the questions that I had more ideas on and had a greater understand of it. In the future, I need to improve my essay by clearly knowing every point in detail. I can do this by reading the play more and analyse the play further.

After writing my essay, I proofread it. I read it over and over again to check for spelling or grammar mistakes. I used this strategy because I thought it was the most effective way. Also, for me it is easier to spot for mistakes if I read it. Maybe not for other people but for me it is. In the future, I can focus on one problem and then move on to the next. Also, I can double-check facts and figures.

The most important thing I learned from this experience is to have a good plan and most importantly, read the question carefully! because I somehow missed it and wrote the essay about all three questions…

Be the first to like.

Inspector Calls Essay

1. I learned that I have yet to actually understand each aspect of the play, especially the deeper meaning. I had an easier time answering the questions that only scratched the surface of what is actually happening for example question 1 as it required a lot less thought about the answer.

2. If I were to choose another question, I believe I would do worse mainly due to the fact that the other questions I had a harder time finding a good way to answer. That is the main reason why I chose the question I did.

3. I did produce a plan. I believe that it helped me significantly as I was able to brain storm idea’s and quickly make changes as many of my original idea’s did not make sense or would not work. While writing I used my plan to see how my idea’s would pan out. I used my plan as a rough draft for my sentences and that allowed me to stay more focused on what idea’s I wanted to include.

4. Once I started writing my essay I decided to follow my strategy of working from the introduction and using that as a guide to what I should include in my paragraphs as it is easier for me to focus then writing out my body paragraphs then writing a introduction. While composing I focus mainly on clearly stating an assertion. However, I was often going slightly off topic. I also focused on trying to link in my idea’s. I need to improve my structure of my essay to make one idea flow into another smoothly.

5. My strategy was writing more slowly and re-reading each sentence after I wrote it due to time constraints. I would rather use the method of reading the paragraphs backwards or quickly changing my focus so the paragraphs seem new to me. One way for me to improve is to set time aside for revising what I have written.

6. I think realizing how little I know is important however, the plan had the greatest impact. This is because while writing the essay, I realized how important my plan actually is and how much more I have to do till I can find an effective method.

Be the first to like.

5 people you meet in heaven- Mitch Albom

5 people you meet in heaven is a novel written by Mitch Albom depicting the life and death of an amusement park maintenance worker Eddie. While attempting to save a girl in a falling ride, he gets killed. In the rest of the book, he is seen on a journey through the five levels of Heaven, each level meeting someone who has affected his life or the other way round.

Overall, I found this story rather impactful. It left me many things to wonder about. The book is mainly about values and life lessons, focusing on the fact that humans are simple. Humans affect one another and sometimes in ways we cannot understand. The book highlights the significance of every individual. No matter what social class you belong to, a person is appreciated in a way or another. No one (regardless of status) should feel that they are less important than another person.

 “Each of us was in your life for a reason. You may not have known the reason at the time, and that is what heaven is for.”

This is my favourite quote from the novel. There is a time for every purpose. I would certainly recommend this novel.

1 person likes this post.

Movie vs. Book

Over the last couple of weeks I have been rereading the book. Tomorrow, when the war began by john Marsden. Before I reread this book. I decided to watch the movie so that I can relate to what I’ve watched to what I’m reading. I deceived to do this because I didn’t really understand the plot line whilst I was reading. Now that I’m more interested in the book because I know what’s going on. I can now see what the author is trying to show the reader. I found it very interesting to see what parts of the book the producer of the movie decided to emphasize on. When I was reading I could notice that the book had a lot more description on the characters because when you watch the movie, you can naturally understand the look personality etc. Now that I have seen the movie I now understand and can relate more to the book.

Be the first to like.

Unbroken by Laura Hillenbrand

I recently began reading Unbroken by Laura Hillenbrand. I was never a big fan of biographies. However, since I began Unbroken I have enjoyed it immensely. Although I’m only about half way, I feel as though I have a basic understanding of the plot.

The story follows Louis Zamperini from a child into his adult life. I enjoyed the beginning when Hillenbrand talked about his mischievous early years before Zamperini got into running. There was a lot of small details, but not to the point that it seemed overdone.

After Zamperini had competed in the 1936 Berlin olympics and World War 2 had really begun, he was drafted into the air force. His plane later crashes in the Pacific Ocean, near Japan. After days drifting across the ocean on life rafts, surrounded my mako sharks, the men on the life boat see a plane fly overhead.

I find the story quite shocking so far but it makes me realize that there are thousands of people who have suffered in similar situations during wars that didn’t make it. Personally, I think that Unbroken is a more impactful book than I usually read and if someone were planning to read it, they should prepare themselves for a more brutal side of human nature.

Be the first to like.

DEAR Journal – April Fools – The Da Vinci Code

“Faith ― acceptance of which we imagine to be true, that which we cannot prove.”

Jacques Saunière, the curator, was found dead in the Louvre Grand Gallery in Paris.

Robert Langdon, the symbologist, was awoken by the call to investigate on the death, since there was odd, unique, unidentifiable symbols carved on the body. Along with French cryptologist and the victom’s daughter, Sophie Neveu, together, they discover the secrets behind the symbols, a secret written by Da Vinci.

It was going to be a fluent investigation, or so they thought; There was always a shadow behind their search.

I think the shadow is Sophie, but I guess I’ll never know until I finish reading the book.


My favorite quote so far appears during Sophie’s flashback: “Life is filled with secrets. You can’t learn them all at once.” Once she saw Mona Lisa’s face, she always wondered why was she smiling, as if she was hiding something. Her grandfather told her that one day, he will reveal the secret, Sophie replies with only rejection, stating how she hates secrets, her grandfather giggles, and says life is filled with secrets. You can’t learn them all at once.

The term secret appears in the book multiple of times, which is a main theme for the Da Vinci Code. This memory appears in the book, the secret of Mona Lisa which also hints the overlaying secrets hidden throughout the whole book.

I would recommend this book for people over the age of 16 since there are some quite descriptive scenes of somewhat sickening deaths.

Be the first to like.

The Catcher in the Rye by J.D Salinger

Currently, I’m still reading this novel, progressing past the halfway point. This story revolves around the perspective and thoughts of the main character, Holden Caulfield. I have a few thoughts and personal interpretation on his personalities. Firstly, I do not find Holden to be as whiny/annoying as many people make him to be, in contrast I feel he is pretty humorous and friendly. However I do find him to be a a hypocrite as he commonly accused people to being a phony, ironically Holden is probably the biggest phony in this novel. This is evidence as he often tries to fake his true intention as well as not using his real name in certain circumstances. Furthermore, Holden is actually from a decent family, having gone to a private school and have some depressed perspective on life. Throughout the story he is seen to be lonely with have no true friends, however he does show a great affection for his siblings, the only few people that he describes with only positive description

You never saw a little kid so pretty and smart in your whole life. She’s really smart. I mean she’s had all A’s ever since she started school. As a matter of fact, I’m the only dumb one in the family. My brother D.B.’s a writer and all, and my brother Allie, the one that died, that I told you about, was a wizard. I’m the only really dumb one.

This is my favorite quote as it really show the more humble of Holden, and how he still fell alienated even in his family. I enjoyed how he really cares about his siblings, you can really feel the love that he shows towards them.

Be the first to like.

Question about ‘An Inspector Calls’

1. At the beginning, Arthur Birling is resented as a highly respected person and is classified as the sort of person who looks down at others below them. It is made obvious that Birling did not believe in, ‘treat others the way you want to be treated.’ Hence, Birling looked down at others that were lower than him and treated them as if they were nothing. The way he talked about firing people and his company so casually as if it wasn’t a big was the biggest giveaway that Birling was a highly respected person as he could disrespect others so much without having to worry about his image.

However, as the play progresses, the inspector keeps on catching Birling off guard. Birling would ask the inspector if he was trying to disrespect him and the inspector would answer honestly. As, if it was another person talking to Birling, the person would not retaliate against him, but just go along with what Birling said. They wouldn’t want to anger a man with such powers, unlike the inspector.

After the inspector left in act 3, when the inspector left they thought that it was all a joke; since they asked the police force if there was an inspector Goole and the said, ‘no’. They thought that it could have been just something that happened to them and no one would find out about it so it wouldn’t damage their image. Everyone started to relax and Birling slowly becomes full of himself again. He acted as if the inspector did not just undermine him so much that it damaged his self-esteem.


2. He followed the same outlines as it would normally. It sort of moves from one end to the other. As the story moves along the people within the room, the audience finds out more and more about each of the characters and true story behind everything.

*I’m not too sure about this question*


3. The play was based in a whole century ago, hence, things were done very differently now compared to then. The fact that nowadays, the police force would be very careful as to who they send. Also for a inspector to come, they would require ID and all sorts identifications to assure the client who the inspector actually is.

Be the first to like.

The Catcher in the Rye – Dear Entry

Over the previous days, I began reading The Catcher in the Rye, and although I have only read several pages, I find it rather pleasurable thus far. The novel commences with the protagonist, Holden Caulfield, recounting his story at Pencey Preparatory – a private school in Agerstown, Pennsylvania. From reading the opening sentence of the novel, the reader gets dragged into Holden’s world, where they can follow his exact thought processes, as well as the ups and downs of his life. By using first person to narrate the novel, it creates a subjective style from the point of view of Holden, which allows us to be in his shoes. This novel evolves around major issues of identity, belonging, loss and alienation.

“Life is a game, boy. Life is a game that one plays according to the rules” (page 9).

I particularly liked this line in the novel. This line is excerpted from the conservation between Mr Spencer, Holden’s history teacher, and Holden. Spoken by Mr Spencer, it is addressed to Holden when he pays him a visit. I find this line significant, as it brings an insight into Holden’s world and conveys to the reader the circumstances he is situated in. “Life is a game” implies the competition involved, as well as the sense that one can either win or lose in the game. Moreover, life is about making incorrect decisions then starting over, acquiring knowledge from previous failures and utilising them to ensure you win the game or gain the best results. Mr Spencer is encouraging Holden to not succumb to his current circumstances and instead, to give it another shot. Not only does this encouragement apply to Holden, but is further conveyed to the reader – to inspire and spark a flare of hope in those who are situated in obnoxious circumstances.

1 person likes this post.

Allegiant – April

Allegiant is the book I have been reading. I have been reading others book but recently I came back to this book. Unlike other books in the Divergent trilogy, this book is written from the perspective of Tris and Tobias. This quote was said by Tobias in the book:

“I have never had parents who set good examples, parents whose expectations were worth living up to, but she did. I can see them within her, the courage and the beauty they pressed into her like a handprint.”

Tobias was talking about Tris in this sentence. I really liked the metaphor about how Tris’s courage and beauty was like a handprint by her parents. This is because when I think of a handprint, I think of DNA and genetic things. So I can see what the author meant by how Tris adopted her parent’s courage and beauty. Therefore when I read this quote I thought it just clicked (do you ever feel like that?)

Be the first to like.

The Spook’s Curse

I just recently finished reading: The Spook’s Curse by Joseph Delaney. I really enjoyed this book as it helped to fill in the mini cliff hanger that was produced at the end of the first book. This is the second book in the Wardstone chronicles. It is a recount of the life of a Spook while he was still in his apprenticeship. The book starts off with the intense activity of capturing a deadly creature that goes ‘bump in the night’ called a boggart. After a series of unfortunate events in the previous book, the Spook is recovering from a near death ordeal and sends Tom, to perform the job himself. Following Tom’s departure, the Spook’s brother dies and they plan to attend the funeral, however the Spook’s agenda is not limited to only paying his respects. A girl with red pointed shoes, a pope like figure with a hatred towards Spook’s and a love story about a witch causes the story to take a few unexpected turns. I would recommend this slightly fantasy, adventure and coming of age book to anyone who wants a quick and short read and is not looking for anything challenging but likes to be captivated.

Be the first to like.

Lesser’s play review review

In Wendy Lesser’s review of An Inspector Calls, she focuses on the details of the production and constantly directs the reader’s attention to the subtle connections made between the audience and the characters of the play. Wendy Lesser refers to extremely intricate parts of the play; she writes about the gestures made by the characters, their dialogue, the sound and light effects, etc. In one particular mentioning of Inspector Goole, Lesser makes the link between the Inspector’s surname and the word “ghoul.” “We needn’t harp on the Inspector’s surname – the play, in any case, spells it out for us. (Literally. We are twice told that his name is G-O-O-L-E, as if to assure us by negation that it is really G-H-O-U-L)” (33). This points to the specificity of Lesser’s analysis of the entire theatrical production. Wendy Lesser creates such an elaborate analysis of Priestly’s play, that the reader may feel in awe of the great amount of hidden or deeper meanings behind bits and pieces of the presentation.

In addition, the detailed examination of a single gesture made by Edna in the play further demonstrates how much attention Lesser gives towards the theatrical work. “Edna raises her arm toward the house, a gesture that seemingly causes the whole building to crack open down a vertical seam in its front…This produces additional light, and more importantly, it produces clarity: for the first time, we can fully see and comfortably hear characters whose conversation has thus far come through to us only in fragmented, muffled bits. In this respect, Edna functions in this scene as our servant” (33). Lesser suggests that as the audience of the play, one can feel that the Birlings at certain points of the production represent themselves. What the author of the review puts forward is the relationship between the characters of the play and the audience. In a broader perspective, Lesser makes the connection that in good theatrical productions, each piece is significant as it is open to various interpretations and provide the audience with meaning and purpose which perhaps we could relate to. Using An Inspector Calls as an example, she concludes that emotion and empathy is required to be felt in good theatrical productions and “coming together in a theater, we are asking to share something with those around us and those onstage.”

Be the first to like.

Wendy Lesser’s Review of An Inspector Calls

In Wendy Lesser’s review of An Inspector Calls was similar in a few ways to Jeffery Miller. They both spoke highly of the play however her review was slightly more detailed and focuses on different aspects. Lesser went into a lot of detail about Inspector Goole. She believes that the director of the play and the Inspector were similar in a way.

This interpretation of An Inspector Calls was directed by Stephen Daldry. Lesser seemed to “understand” what the director wrote in a different way than most plays. She felt as though the director made good use of the lights and stage which made the performance more enjoyable for her.

I mostly agree with the comments that Wendy made. For example, she states how Sheila and Eric were wanting their parents to confess to anything they did before the inspector got the information out of them the hard way.

Both Miller and Lesser’s reviews were raving, however I found that Miller’s was a little more one sided than Lesser’s. In my opinion, he tried to criticize the characters without fulling looking at the play while Lesser delved in deep and really got the right story about the characters

Be the first to like.

An Inspector Calls: A Lesser Review

When I was finished the part-epic-part-review and retired to the hospital to treat for my great journey to the end of the page, I couldn’t help but notice a connection between Lesser’s own review, to Miller’s.  Likewise to Miller, Lesser only sees Gerald as a highly touted aristocrat with ‘the attitude of a master’, an attribute someone like Birling would possess. Both reviews are highly contradictory to the Gerald character our class has come to know, and I’d say that both are wrong. Unlike Miller’s review, however, Lesser did provide some sort of evidence to support her assertion, which was that Gerald didn’t see the extras like Sheila did. This may be due to Daldry’s own error, as he himself didn’t give Gerald’s actor any instruction in regards to the extras, which built on his aristocratic, ‘Geraldish’ behaviour.  Also, both pointed out the ‘defiance’ of sorts that the younger generation put up against the older beings.

Despite the one minor resemblance between the reviews, Lesser’s review on a whole was more in depth, though her review does rival the length of Ulysses. Lesser noted the how Goole in fact sounded like ghoul, with the slight assumption of him possibly being Casper’s own kind. She also talks about Edna’s importance in the play, one character which I really never thought more than just a support’s supporting character. As if to further proves Edna’s part in the whole Smith suicide debacle, Lesser groups Edna with Sheila and Eric as the ‘likeable, comparatively heroic figures’

The best part of the review in my opinion was how Lesser identified the importance of the new beginning. As I wrote on my reflection on Miller’s review, I all but denounced Daldry’s change the start of An Inspector Calls, and asked if the play itself benefited at all to the new beginning. It did. Lesser explains perfectly how the beginning built on the older beings outright refusal to acknowledge an extra, and regard them as ‘simply and element in the portentously disturbing atmosphere’. In short, I found Lesser’s review to be far less enjoyable than Miller’s, largely, and well, wholly responsible for by the length. The redeeming factor though, is how she refuted Plato’s ‘attack on drama’ by contradicting his age old reasoning by saying yes, fictional plays do have a value of truth in the real world, which is, if it were up to my guess and that’s never good, the purpose of An Inspector Calls.

Be the first to like.

A Review on An Adaption of A Playwright’s Play

A Review of a Review of a Play by J. B. Priestley
An Inspector Calls

Review of Wendy Lesser’s Inspection – An Inspector Calls review

Wendy Lesser’s review of Stephen Daldry’s adaption of J. B. Priestly’s An Inspector Calls starts with detailed descriptions of the introduction of the play. He uses precise, accurate language to describe each detail of the opening.

He emphasizes the fact the the opening lines of Daldry’s adaption does not start off the way it is supposed to be. “All right, Edna. I’ll ring from the drawing room when we want coffee. (P31.Para3)” In my opinion, this line shows his disappointment towards the adaption of the play, but he praises everything else. Just the introduction of the preview shows his appreciation of the unique background music that sets the mood, the lighting, the set design, and many more.

Even though I already know about the Goole-Ghoul confusion, but this review made me think of something more. In here, it talks about how ghoul means something that does not exist, it is something that has been created by the Birling’s own minds. What if detective Goole was nothing but just a fake, a fantasy, a figment of the imagination — then he never existed at all.

“He wasn’t an inspector,” Arthur Birling said, he isn’t a real inspector. Then they receive a phone call with another inspector on the way. What if Goole isn’t a real thing, it is a guilt within the Billings + Croft?

1 person likes this post.

Wendy Lesser’s Review

Compared to Jeffrey Miller’s review, this is a ton more detailed, providing more description on the setting and stage directions. Being more in depth, it also contains more points and analysis in contrast to Jeffrey Miller’s review. Furthermore, she did a fine job in describing each of the characters; However, I felt Jeffrey Miller won in this aspect as I felt he did a better job in describing the character. Reading both the text and what other people have written, they all mentioned that Gerald was not described by both reviewers accurately. This got me to start thinking, maybe it isn’t Jeffrey Miller or Wendy Lesser error in thinking of Gerald as a snob, but it could be Daldry’s adaptation that made Gerald less innocent compare to how Priestly wanted Gerald to be.

Moving on to another interesting bit I found from her analysis is how she further relate to Inspector Goole being fake. When I first watched the Movie, I was most interested in who exactly this “Inspector Goole” really is. Was he a hoaxer? Or was he a gimmick created by a friend of Eva Smith? Another theme in the play that i only realize through reading her review is that higher class reluctance and inability to follow their lower order. Aden Gillet the actor who played Gerald mentioned that ” My character just doesn’t see them-wouldn’t know how to react”. This line shows the ignorance of the upper class not looking at the maids and waitress as people but more like tools.

Overall, I round this to be a worthwhile read, as I have understood the play slightly better than before.

1 person likes this post.

Lesser’s review on An Inspector Calls

After carefully reading Lesser’s review on An Inspector Calls, I realized that she got into depth and detailed description of the characters and storyline than to Miller’s review, so then that provokes more intense questions to the reader. For instance, she recommended how we don’t exactly know if the Inspector showed the same photograph to all of the members in the Birling family. It was obvious that he didn’t show the picture to them all at once, but no one had the proof that the picture was the same or different each time the Inspector showed it to them. I don’t exactly approve that what Lesser is saying is correct, but I also don’t disagree with that point. Lesser also commented on some question that we’ve discussed in class, like: was Inspector Goole a real Inspector?

I concentrated on reading her observation to each character’s actions and intension for needing to hear the others’ confessions. It has a sequence to the personality of each character when they find out they might be part of the suicide, and the writer writes it such ways to attract the audience’s attention to the characters feelings and have sympathy for them or anger. Like having “Inspector Goole essentially being a director of the whole act”. It’s kind of surprising because Mr. birling is supposed to be like the instructor instead the Inspector had taken control.

Wendy has described Goole’s speech in a abnormally distinct way, I quite liked it. Overall, I agreed with most of the opinions Lesser stated, mostly because she described how the author created an image to the reader about leading the characters into one direction and not letting them find out what really happened in the end. Like when Shelia already knew the truth and were begging her parents to admit the truth, at first they kept talking then in the end they regret saying what they said about Eric.

1 person likes this post.

Lesser’s review on An Inspector Calls

Miller’s review on the characters were much more negative as compared to Lesser’s review on the characters. For every character in the play, he pointed out the flaws and bad side of them. For example, he described Sheila Birling to be “high-bred, conscience-stricken daughter” and Eric Birling “spoiled and neglected”. Lesser on the other hand expressed that both Shelia and Eric were “likeable, comparatively historical figures”, stating that she is able to see the “silent figures”(the working force), also “recalling the girl’s (Eva Smith’s) inerictable death, when the others” tried to “forget or ignore it”. In this case, Lesser is trying to show the audience that Sheila was very different from her family. She was empathetic and cared about the working class, unlike her parents who were more concerned about their reputation and business.


One thing I found rather interesting was that Lesser emphasized a lot about Edna the Birling’s housemaid in the play. Although she is a minor in the play, she is the one who “initiates one of the most dramatically spectacular moments in the production”. Her announcement to the Birlings on the arrival of the Inspector starts the tension and argument seen later on in the interrogation of the Birlings. Among the characters, she is the one who has the most movements. She is the one “fetching and carrying bucketfuls of water”, “taking his (Inspector Goole’s) coat while the family chatters on idly”, “rolling out the carpet for the imperious lady to step on” and more. She is also one of the more favoured character in the play.

Be the first to like.

An Inspector Calls – Review by Wendy Lesser

While reading Lesser’s review, i noticed some things that were not on the previous review of Jeffery Miller. For example, the fact that Lesser mentioned what we mentioned in class – the interplay between the Inspector’s name G-O-O-L-E and the word G-H-O-U-L, but Miller didn’t mention anything of the sort. The idea has crossed my mind that GOOLE sounds just like GHOUL, Which Lesser says it implies he is a ghost. But she does not say, however, that The inspector could be some kind of angel (also a supernatural being), a God; we get this through his knowledge that he know everything, even before it actually happened.

Another thing i thought she was correct in saying was how “the younger Birlings pointedly contradict their parents”. The younger generating – Sheila and Eric Birling – have a different way of viewing what happened. They don’t just believe in the facts, like Lesser says, they believe in reality and that we are each responsible for each other’s actions. The two generations contradict each other, as Lesser states, “Evidence and perception, illusion and disillusionment, response and individual belief”. I agree with her on this fact. She also states that “Sheila… [is the] most sympathetic figure in the family”, and i have the same opinion about this.

It has come to my attention that both reviews we read talked about the beginning scene and how it had a powerful effect, even though it wasn’t written in J. B. Priestly’s script. From reading both reviews, I still don’t wuite understand the affect of having children appear in the first scene. Should the first scene be captivating and interesting? (sort of like an essay?) The explosion at the end also struck me  in a sense that i didn’t really get what it was needed.

Daldry’s adaptation fo Edna really hit me. She was not very similar to the version we saw. Personally, I prefer the movie version we watched. I don’t agree to the fact the Lesser called Edna a “heroic figure”. She also states that Edna i capable os see ing the fure and perceiving whats not yet happened. I also don’t think that Edna plays such a big role in the play that she is like Sheila and Eric of the younger society generation.

Be the first to like.

Wendy Lesser’s Review

After reading Wendy’s review of, An Inspector Calls, I feel as if, both the reviews we had read are very similar. They both talk about the characters, but I feel as if Wendy concentrated more on the inspector, and she said he was the most important character. I strongly agree with her assertion, because with out the Inspector’s straight forward points the play wouldn’t be as strong to if the inspector was a normal inspector that is nice to his client.

In Wendy’s review she talked about how Daldry set up the stage, and how it should have a lighter background or a different stage light. Whereas, Miller didn’t comment on this in his review.

In her review she said that “Well he inspected us, all alright” a quote by sheila,  as the funniest line in the play. I agree with this because, Sheila kept on warning her mum to be careful of what she was saying, and she never listened. I feel that line is quite Ironic because the inspector didn’t really need to know the answers to his questions, because he already knew them. Which makes me wonder why the Inspector even came to inspect them anyway.

Be the first to like.

Review by Wendy Lesser – An Inspector Calls

An Inspector Calls is a famous play and has been directed many different times to create many different atmospheres and thoughts that vary from each other. Sometimes the play is presented in a way that is dislikes by the audience, however, other times the play may be presented in a more intriguing manner that satisfies the audience. In this case Wendy lesser viewed the play when it was directed by Stephen Daldry at the Royale Theatre (New York) during 1994.

The reviewed focused on the characters instead of the story line, however, Daldry mentioned that that those the script changed from cliche to melodramatic within seconds, its not the hardest part of the play. The setting of the play is the most difficult. I found that questioning as Priestley had mentioned that it was set within a small dinner area quit enclosed. Though with the amount of exits that is mentioned it gives the readers the idea that it may be place at a more open area.

I was quite surprised when the inspector was said to be somewhere between a play-writer and a director. I never viewed him as more than a character. But now that it was mentioned, it changed my mindset of the play. I realised that the inspector does drive the characters in a direction that would suit his liking and he basically shaped the entire play. He built up the characteristics of each character without the audience really realising until the end. Which tend to be the directors job.

Overall, I found myself agreeing with most of the points Lesser stated. One was the fact that towards the end, guilt all that was felt for Shelia and Eric. They both begged for their parents to admit the truth. The strategies she kept on mentioning also makes you wonder which of the characters you as the audience can relate to or be compared to the most. It makes you wonder if you are a Author Birling who believed he had not done anything wrong or a Shelia who just wanted everyone to tell the truths so they can al take the blame of their action without digging themselves a deeper hole


1 person likes this post.

An Inspector Calls – Wendy Lesser’s review

Wendy Lesser and Jeffrey Miller’s reviews had their similarities and differences.

The main difference was that Lesser’s review was much more detailed. Also, Lesser wrote more ideas of why Daldry used different light or background for his play. On the other hand, Miller did not write anything about why he thought Daldry used it and how he feels about it.

I thought it was quite impressive how Lesser realised the little details Daldry made to the play. For example, Lesser wrote about how the lighting designer, Rick Fisher, would move a silent extra six inches upstage so that the light could catch his face in a certain way. I like the information she told us because now I know a little more about what it is like to me the crew making the play. Not the audience watching the play. This part really caught my attention.

In Lesser’s writing, she mentioned how the funniest line of the play was by Sheila: ” Well he inspected us, all right”. I disagree with her because I do not see how this line is funny. I thought it was just a line Priestly put in his play to describe Sheila’s sympathetic towards Eva Smith and how the whole society works.

Be the first to like.

Wendy Lesser

An inspector calls is a very intriguing play from 1945. An inspector calls is one of those plays which asks yourself a lot of questions. That is why there have been many reviews on the play which shows peoples opinions on what believe the mysterious inspector is like etc. Both Jeffery Miller and Wendy Lesser have positive reviews of the play, An inspector calls. But both Jeffery Miller and Wendy Lesser focus on different parts of the play. Example Wendy Lesser in his review talks a fair bit about how the inspector sounds like he is possibly the director, while also being a actor in the play. The inspector makes me think that he could possible be the ‘director’ because the inspector really makes the whole play flow. Example with him asking questions. Jeffery miller believes that Gerald Croft is a “one-dimensional slimball.” This was obvious just in jeffery millers thoughts because Wendy Lesser focuses on how the inspector is like the director.

Be the first to like.

An Inspector Calls – Jeffery Miller’s Review

After I read Jeffery Miller’s review. I did not agree with how he described some of the play’s character. Such as: Gerald and Eric.

In the review, Miller described Gerald’s character as “one-dimensional slime ball”. I believe the character Gerald Priestly displayed in his play is not the same as what Miller described. In Priestly’s play, it is strongly suggested that Gerald felt guilty for cheating on Sheila and regret not taking care of Eva Smith. In Miller’s description, Gerald is described as unsympathetic and cheated on Sheila purposely. Another character I disagree with Miller is Eric. Miller explained him as “the spoiled and neglected son”. The reason I do not agree with this idea is because he stole money from his father’s company, if he was spoiled then he could have just asked his parents for money and they would say yes. Even though he would have to come up with a good excuse but their parents would accept since he is a “spoiled” son. Although i do not agree with him being spoiled, I agree with how he is neglected. This is shown when Gerald and Mr. Birling refused to tell him what they were joking about at the dinner table.

Be the first to like.

Wendy Lesser’s Review on An Inspector Calls

Lesser’s review was similar to that of Jeffrey Miller’s. However is was got more into depth of the plot  and characters than that of the latter. Lesser takes into account the possibilities that could have occurred if some things were altered. For example, she comments on how we don’t really know if  the Inspector showed the same photograph to all the members of the Birling family. This thought has actually crossed my mind before but I never paid much attention to it as I thought it was highly unlikely, but after reading this review it has made me ponder though old thoughts and new ones gathered by it. Lesser also commentates on the following questions: who was this Inspector Goole? Was he even a real inspector? And if he was not a member of the Brumley police force, why should they believe any part of the story he wove? I had a hard time deciphering if wether or not he was a genuine inspector. It does occur to me that he may not be involved at all with the police but as some say, he was indeed a genuine fake. I agree with Lesser’s point of view on Sheila Birling, and how she was the most responsible and sympathetic member of the family, no questions to it. Another thing she also said that i admire was “Indeed, it is only by separating the two (the guilt and the death) that Daldry and Priestley can lure us into feeling guilty”.

One thing that surprised me was how Lesser picked up on one tiny ‘error’ (shall we call it) in Priestly’s play, and that was the set. The whole story takes place in the dinning room (we are not quite sure of the size) but the fact that she noticed where the phone call would come from strike me as differently, she is quite observant. I quite like the questions she raised later on as well: How real are they to us? And How real are the feelings they produce in us? It helps me contemplate the effects the play has on us audience. I also really agree to her observation: each character’s motive for wanting to hear the others’ confessions bears a striking resemblance to an audiences’s ghoulish interest. It had never really occurred to me to apply the characters to what we audiences are feeling/thinking. Similar to what Jeannie has said, Lesser’s comment on Inspector Goole essentially being a director surprises me. I wouldn’t have taken most of the things she has mentioned into serious account. This statement has somewhat brightened my understanding of the importance of the inspector; I couldn’t coincide more on this view.

I really enjoyed how Lesser described Goole’s speech: rapid-fire, oddly uninflected, in a rhythmically pronounced way. Also how she observed that during a certain part of the play, the roles seemed to be reversed so the audience were “spotlit” and the actors in “darkness”. Most people, including me, wouldn’t think of it in this manner but I admire that she did. The fact that Lesser took notice of Edna’s importance enlightens me, it make me see a different side of her character as opposed to what the original play portrays. Lesser comments on how in one part of Daldry’s play, Edna somewhat becomes our servant as she executes things for our benefits, like the lighting for example.

I quite liked one specific thing she mentioned: “The specific detail both matter intensely and didn’t matter at all.” Which is very much true.

Wendy Lesser goes into more depth of the details about the set and especially more about the Inspector, which is something Jeffrey Miller left aside. Miller reviewed more on the Birling family more than the play as a whole. Lesser went to great depths to make sure she covered every significant and not so significant points, however both mentioned deeply about the way Inspector Goole meanders his ‘victims’. Miller also utilized more sophisticated and ‘harder’ words than Lesser did in her review, hers seems a little less formal. Nonetheless it is still a great review with outstanding and unimaginable points/views on the play.

Be the first to like.

Wendy Lesser’s Review on An Inspector Calls

Similarly, Wendy Lesser highly praised Daldry’s production of An Inspector Calls in the same manner as Jeffery Miller had. However, Lesser leads our attention to details that Miller did not pinpoint, which further provokes thoughts and questions within us. “The Inspector himself fills a role somewhere between that of a play-wright and that of a director.” I was somehow enlightened by this statement, since I never viewed Inspector Goole as anything more than an Inspector – a fabricated character. Nevertheless, without the role of the Inspector, An Inspector Calls would only exist as a plain script without a director.

Additionally, Lesser points out that “a central form of obliviousness in An Inspector Calls is the wealthy characters’ inability to perceive the lower orders” and those who are less privileged than the Birlings. Lesser further refers to and makes connection with the audience/reader by alluding to the homeless beggars who are always existing, “whether in Times Square of under Waterloo Bridge”. Through this reference and connection, she raises the question that whether or not we are oblivious to those who are less privileged than us, like the wealthier characters in An Inspector Calls are?

I was rather struck by Lesser’s interpretation of the housemaid Edna and her significance in the play. Instead of keeping Edna offstage as Priestley’s stage directions have specified, Daldry insists to keep her onstage for the entire play. He offers us a contrasting point of view regarding the significance of Edna, in which Lesser states that she is compatible with Sheila and Eric Birling – the younger generation who is “capable of seeing the future, of perceiving what’s not yet there.”

Furthermore, she states that “Gerald Croft never sees the silent figures at all” and that his actions imply class invisibility which conveys “the attitude of a master who can ‘just ignore’ his servants.” Likewise, Jeffery Miller views Gerald Croft as an “one-dimensional slimeball”. However, both judgements are contradictory and incompatible with the Gerald we have interpreted thus far. He certainly sees the “silent figures” and those who are less privileged than him, which is the exact opposite of being oblivious to their presence as Lesser has declared. An instance of this is his passionate relationship with Daisy Renton and despite the fact that she belongs to the lower, working class, he does not appear to be troubled at all. In conclusion, Lesser’s review is not only informative, but collectively enlightening and thought-provoking.

Be the first to like.

An Inspector Calls: Review

I agreed with most of Jeffery S. Miller’s opinions. For example, I believe that his view and interpretation of the actions of both Sheila and Eric were correct as well as the descriptions used, “high bred conscience-stricken daughter… spoiled and neglected son” are very realistic and portray the characters in a befitting manner. Also using the description pompous patriarch seems to be tailored to suit Mr Birling.  However, I disagree to the opinions of Inspector Goole. Firstly, I do not believe that Inspector Goole was rarely cool or removed from his inquiry. Instead I believe he was the exact opposite. I think that his manner was more ‘get it over with’ and he acted in such a way that he knew all the answers so it required him to do very little speaking and only slight nudges showing a removed manner. Also I think that the inspector did not, “pounce on them with teeth-bared severity” but state each line with a hurried tone like he wished everything would finish much quicker.

Be the first to like.

Informative and agreeable

The theatre review offers many new insightful perspectives on the play previously unnoticed by me. The fact that Daldry opened the scene with children relics and listening to the radio was a creative way to start. The story goes into reverse order and what Miller said about it I thought was quite interesting: “ from the initial safety of distance and time.” Safety from what?

One thing I particularly agree with is how through nuances we managed to show sympathy for adulterer. “These sibling symbolise all the rights and privileges of inherited position”. I hadn’t noticed before but I agree. I found the review all in all very informative and agreeable.

Be the first to like.

Different perspectives

“An Inspector Calls” is a play which I actually hadn’t had the opportunity to even know about before it was presented in literature class. The review we were given today regarding the acted out play was very interesting; it provides us with different perspectives. So far, we have only witnessed one version of the play being interpreted. Therefore, this essay is enriching us. I wasn’t aware of the fact that play directors allowed themselves to interpret plays so differently. After having read and studied the original script composed by J.B. Priestley in 1903, it seems as if  Daldry’s  version of “An Inspector Calls” includes add-ons and transformations. I want to attend an “An Inspector calls” play sometime as the witness’s description gives it a nice feeling. Although I am unsure whether theatrical plays are still carried out in this way since we are almost a couple decades ahead of that account.

Be the first to like.

An Inspector Calls : Review by Jeffrey Miller

Generally I agreed with the analysis of each characters, theme and emotions. What I find inspiring is his accurate use of each vocabulary, not for the sake of using “fancy words” but to keep the article short and precise. Another thing is his able to describe each character characteristic with less than a sentence. What made me somewhat unsatisfied with his review is that the lack of criticism, as he barely touch on what could be improve from the production.Daldry’s adaptation have some varying facts and portrayal from the original play as the beginning was (unnecessary) added into the play. Another difference is the portrayal of Gerald, as in this play he is portray more like Arthur Birling, more opportunistic and more despicable. However, after thinking through this alternate characterization, I found myself quite fond of this idea as it would bring more arrogance and heartlessness thoughts towards the upper class. Jeffrey Miller have indeed convinced me into agreeing with his description.

Be the first to like.

Jeffrey Miller’s Review on An Inspector Calls

Jeffery Miller highly commended Stephen Daldry’s production of An Inspector Calls, describing it as “more than the removal of dirt and time from an old gem”. In general, I concur with Miller, especially his descriptions of Arthur Birling, Sybil Birling, Sheila and Eric. I believe he accurately employed diction that portrays the characters effectively. For instance, he describes Eric using words such as “spoiled” and “neglected”, provoking the idea that Mrs Birling’s negligence of her son is what resulted in her oblivion to his behaviour and attitude.

However, the Gerald Croft we have interpreted thus far happens to be slightly contradictory to the one reviewed by Jeffery Miller. As Miller states, “Gerald Croft; where he could be a one-dimensional slimeball, Hilyer finds nuance which evokes genuine sympathy for this unsavoury opportunist.” The Gerald Croft we have come across is an upper-class man and although he has cheated on his fiancée, his personality is conveyed generally as good-natured. His compassion is shown through his remorse upon hearing the girl’s suicide and through his account, we are able to perceive his heartfelt affection for Daisy Renton. Gerald’s behaviour does not utterly suggest that he is an “unsavory opportunist”, seeing that the Croft family has a higher social standing than the Birlings. Moreover, instead of Gerald, I perceive the main opportunist in this play as Arthur Birling, which can be interpreted through his avariciousness in numerous instances.

Be the first to like.

An Inspector Calls – Jeffrey S. Miller Review

Jeffrey S. Miller creates a precise review of the descriptions of the characters. Although i did not understand quite a bit of the language he use, I agree with his view of the characters, especially about Sheila and Eric Birling. His view is correct about how they are similar since they are both of the younger generation, as mentioned in class. Both of them experience “denial, discovery, rage and despair.” They loose hope at the end. They give up trying hide the truth about the girl. As Miller mentioned in paragraph 5, there is a strong disapproval of “lack of human feeling LURKING JUST BENEATH THE RIGID MASK OF PROPRIETY”. I agree with this view if his, just like Mr MacKnight mentioned in class: there is a literal meaning, and there is a hidden meaning just the surface.

What puzzled me about Daldry’s version of An Inspector Calls was the beginning of the play. I wonder why he started the scene with little kids listening to the radio. Maybe to set the time and year? Another point that struck me with confusion was the fact that Miller’s review of the inspector didm not mention anything about him being a supernatural being, whether a ghoul (like his name, or a God-like being (due to his knowledge of everything and everyone). Miller did though, mention the inspector being mysterious.

Be the first to like.

Jeffrey Miller’s Review of An Inspector Calls

Jeffery Miller’s review of An Inspector Calls was very in depth and well written. It was obvious that he knew the play well as did he the characters. His insight of some of the personas were very intricate and elaborate to the smallest detail. in my opinion, he states the relationships and characteristics of Sheila best. It seemed as though he enjoyed the play and left a raving review which he justified with many points. Personally, I’m not very into plays, much less reviews of them however I enjoyed Miller’s. I was fond of the powerful and descriptive vocabulary he used, for example, he was describing the  ‘swirling, menacing grey sky.’ I also thought the style of writing was fit to my taste, using a variety of language tools. What especially helped was that I enjoyed the play itself and seeing someone else praise it to a high standard made me feel more justified in enjoying it.

Be the first to like.

Jeffrey Miller’s Review

After reading Jeffrey Miller’s review about ‘An Inspector Calls’, i felt that everything he said is completely accurate and extremely on point. I really enjoyed the invincible words he has chosen to use for describing the characters. For example, “soon be interrupted by the imminent arrival of the mysterious” Inspector Goole. This quote from Jeffrey is true because the word Goole means spooky and ghost-like. Even though his description of inspector Goole is on point, but i don’t see why Gerald is repulsive person, but my opinion is that Gerald is only feeling a pity for Daisy that died, he still cared for her but that doesn’t mean that he is forgetting about Sheila. This also gives us a direct hint that Gerald only got engaged with Sheila because of her father’s business and not because he loved her. Overall, i really enjoyed Miller’s review, i found it incredibly

Be the first to like.

No one can mess around with him

In Miller’s review on the play An Inspector Calls, I noticed that he used very strong words to describe the characters in the play. For Arthur Birling, Miller used “pompous patriarch” to show his character. Pompous is an adjective used to describe someone who is overbearing, domineering. Patriarch is defined as the guiding light, the guru of the family. In this context, Arthur Birling is seen as an authoritative man even in the family. Everyone in the family has to submit to him. “Guiding light” gives me the idea of Arthur Birling being the only light source. Without him, the others will not be able to survive. For Inspector Goole, Miller described him pouncing on the Birlings with teeth-bared severity. To pounce on someone is to leap on, attack someone without him knowing. This word is used mainly when a predator attacks its prey. In this case, Inspector Goole is likened to a predator. On the inside, Inspector Goole is preying on them. Teeth-bared severity shows that Inspector Goole is up to no good. No one can mess around with him. All in all, I liked how Miller linked some of the characters with animals and other objects and not just stick to the usual phrases/words.

Be the first to like.


As i was reading through the theatre review by Jeffrey S. Miller. It really stunned me how deep he has read into this play. What enlightened me was that how much Jeffery S. Miller and expand on his thoughts of what the play writer is trying to tell us, and what he’s trying to show us. E.g. how the play first appears when the curtains open. Jeffrey S. Miller is showing his thoughts to what he believes the actors and actress try to tell us. Jeffrey S. Miller teaches me that i should be more of a critical thinker not just in how people act, but also in reading poems etc.

Be the first to like.

An Inspector Calls: Review of the Review

I myself am not particularly too keen of reviews as a whole, since I usually trust my own judgement over some reviewer, but found myself to agree with Jefferey Miller’s opinion of An Inspector Calls. Miller highly praised the play, especially the actors, and commended Daldry’s directorial skills, so I have to trust that the actors were in fact decent, as I have not and most likely will never see Daldry’s version of An Inspector Calls. I did have one minor complaint about Daldry’s re-imagination, however, as I found his beginning to be rather useless and uneventful. This might be due to the fact that I’m completely oblivious to whatever reasoning that Daldry may have had, and what impact or emphasis the new beginning brought.  I also noticed that our good Inspector Goole was now ‘forceful and intense’, something I’d thought the Inspector not to be. In fact, I imagined him as cool and removed, but clearly, Cranham’s Goole is not.  Nevertheless, I found Miller’s acclaim of Daldry’s An Inspector Calls to be quite justified.

Be the first to like.

Jeffrey Miller’s Review

When reading Jeffrey’s review I thought that everything he said was completely true. He gave descriptive words to describe characters, and one word that stood out to me was when he called Arthur Birling ‘pompous’ which means to show dignity or importance.  All his descriptions of the characters to me seemed on point except his description of Gerald, he described him to be a disgusting and revolting person, which I don’t think is true. Gerald cared for Daisy, felt sorry for her. I do not see theres anything wrong with that. When they broke up, Gerald did it with care and honestly didn’t want to leave her. I thought that Jeffrey Miller’s review was very well written, the only thing I would change is the description of Gerald.

1 person likes this post.

Jeffrey Miller’s review of An Inspector Calls

In my opinion, Jeffrey Miller’s review is extremely on point. I really admired how he described the described the characters with such powerful words like “pompous” when describing Arthur Birling. I agree to all his descriptions of the characters. Miller mentions how inspector Goole is ‘rarely cook and removed’, I never actually thought it if that way. He then remarks how the Inspector will wheedle the ‘victims’ then lunge at them ‘with teeth-bared severity’. I hadn’t occurred to me that he did that, well in those words at least. It’s an excellent description. However i have to disagree a little on Miller’s description of Gerald Croft. He portrayed Gerald as a mendacious, superficial and repulsive person. Although he (like all the other men in that class) cheated on Sheila Birling, he wasn’t always a ‘one-dimensional’ and ‘sliceable’ kind of person. He cared for Eva Smith very much, as did for Sheila just in a different way. He was not allowed love so that, in a way, I guess was what he deserved for his wrong doings. I also didn’t really like the description of beginning of the play. Not the words but the actual beginning. I thought it was slightly pointless to include in a play like this, it could be just an opener even so, it was unnecessary. But overall, Miller’s review of the play was indeed very precise and thorough.

1 person likes this post.

Dear – Death on the Nile

I have recently been reading Death on the Nile by Agatha Christie, and I have absolutely fallen in love with her writing. This is the fourth book i have read by her so far, and I intend to read even more of her captivating novels. In some ways, her detective stories remind me of An Inspector Calls – the mystery as well as irony. While reading this novel, i came across a quote that that caught my attention very much, and also made me realize how An inspector calls and Death on the Nile are quite similar in many ways. The quote I have chosen is from the beginning of the novel (the murder has not even happened yet), where Rosalie Otterbourne and her mother are deciding where they should go on they holiday trip – and they chose Egypt. Many of the characters “coincidently” are going to Egypt for holidays, which i find is extremely mysterious.


“It is certainly not a matter of life and death,” agreed Mrs Otterbourne. (38)


I chose this quote because, just like the detective story of An Inspector Calls, t contains IRONY in it. Going to Egypt was in fact exactly a matter of life and death.

Even though I have not finished the book, I would recommend anyone to read it; it might help understanding An Inspector Calls a bit more from another detective point of view.

Be the first to like.

Divergent – Veronica Roth

Divergent by Veronica Roth is about a seemingly utopian world turned into a dystopian world. I enjoyed the idea of factions and being able to choose your future. Much of the story is about facing your fears which often is part of my own life.

I throughly enjoyed the first book, however when I read the rest, I felt as though the story was being dragged onto too long and that some less important parts were put into too much detail. The actual writing is not too difficult, however, the length of the series was a bit of a problem for me.

I would recommend Divergent to anyone who enjoys dystopian books with a slight science fiction edge but are also willing to sit down for  a long time and get through the entire series.

Be the first to like.

Recent Comments