Hello, and thank you for joining me for today's English lesson.

My name is Mrs. Butterworth, and I will be guiding you through the learning today.

Now in this lesson, we will be focusing on the setting and stage directions in "An Inspector Calls." So do make sure you have access to that text before we start this lesson.

And I'm really looking forward to this lesson because I think when we look at plays, exploring those stage directions and settings is so important and gives us a real insight into the writer's intentions, in this case, JB Priestley.

Sound good? Great, then let's get started.

So in this lesson, you will explain the importance of setting and understand how stage directions can be used to develop effective characterization.

But before we delve into the lesson, let's look at those all important keywords.

Now, the keywords for today are stage directions, substantial, characterization, naturalistic, and theatrical.

Now, stage directions we will be looking at a lot today.

Now, these are kind of like instructions in a play.

So they're instructions that describe how to move, speak or behave, and the setting, lighting, and sound to help convey the atmosphere and tone.

You may have noticed them in "An Inspector Calls." They're written in italics, so they look slightly different to the dialogues.

That's a really good way to spot those stage directions within a play.

Now, substantial means something that is important or of significant value.

Characterization, now this is a really key one as well for today because characterization is how a character's traits and personality are revealed through their actions, dialogue, and interactions.

So we'll be considering how Priestley crafts his stage directions to really show the characterization of his cast.

Then we have naturalistic.

Now, naturalistic means to portray characters realistic.

Okay, so you focus on natural dialogue, movements, and emotions to reflect real life.

And the opposite of this, I would say, is a theatrical delivery.

So naturalistic and theatrical kind of different there because theatrical is always all about exaggeration.

So gestures are exaggerated, expressions and speech.

So it's more dramatic, over the top, and impactful compared to the more understated and naturalistic performance there.

So the outline of our lesson looks like this.

We've got three learning cycles today.

We're gonna start by understanding the importance of setting before moving on to stage directions and characterization before finishing with some naturalistic versus theatrical delivery.

So let's start with understanding the importance of setting.

So I want you to have a little think about setting first.

So we've got three questions here.

Why do you think the setting of a play is important? How might a play's setting influence its tone or atmosphere? And how could the setting reflect or enhance the themes or messages of a play? Okay, pause the video so you've got time to discuss your ideas on those questions.

If you're working on your own, you may wish to sit and think quietly to yourself.

Pause the video and off you go.

Great, thank you everyone so much for your suggestions.

So we've got some answers here from our Oak pupils.

So as we're reading through these, just think about how they might have aligned to your own discussions.

So Andeep has said that the setting gives context to the story, showing the time, place, and culture.

So I think that's really important, particularly with "An Inspector Calls." It helps our audience understand the characters' actions and beliefs.

Alex says that the setting can create a mood, yes, absolutely, affecting how the audience feels.

For example, a gloomy setting can make scenes feel dramatic or suspenseful.

And this doesn't just apply to plays.

If we think about films too, a setting can really help create a specific mood, can't it? And then Sofia says, "The setting can represent ideas in the play.

For instance, a grand house may show wealth or class, linking to things like equality." That's a really interesting point from Sofia there, thinking about how the setting may have a deeper meaning.

And I think that might be important as we move on to look at "An Inspector Calls." So I just you want to think about your own experiences of setting now.

So can you think of a story or play you've read or seen where the setting had a big impact? How would the story change if it was set in a completely different time or place? So I just want to hear your experiences here.

So pause the video so you've got time to discuss those questions.

Off you go.

Okay, true or false time.

Setting is not an important aspect of a play.

Is that true or false? Give me your answer now.

Okay, great.

Well done.

So everyone noted it was false, so setting is not an important aspect of a play, it is actually that answer is false.

So now you need to justify why that statement is false.

Give me your answer now please.

Okay, great.

Some really great suggestions there.

I'm going to share one now.

Hopefully, it's similar to what you said.

So the setting is actually crucial in a play as it can establish the context, mood, and reflect characters' values.

So we can be thinking about this as we explore the setting of "An Inspector Calls." So we have an image here.

It's a very grand image, isn't it? So just spend a few moments looking really closely at this image.

And then I would like you to discuss, please, what do you notice about the furniture, the decoration, the lighting, and overall atmosphere? And then also what does this room suggest about the family that owns it? Okay, so when you are ready, pause the video so you can discuss your answer to the question.

If you're working on your own, you can think quietly to yourself or even jot some ideas down.

Pause the video.

I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

Great, thank you everyone so much for those suggestions.

So lots of you commenting on kind of the grandness and opulence of that room, how it was really highly decorated, looks quite wealthy and rich.

So there's lots there that we can think about in terms of that image, and I want you to keep that image in your mind as we go forward.

So in "An Inspector Calls," Priestley uses specific and detailed stage directions to convey his setting.

And Priestley's setting is deliberately chosen to reinforce his themes and messages.

So if you think back to one of our initial discussions, if you remember Sofia, our Oak pupil, said that sometimes setting can have a deeper meaning, it can link to a place, themes, or ideas.

And in "An Inspector Calls," this is definitely the case.

So what I would like you to do, please, is I would like you please to read the stage directions at the start of Act 1.

So they are on pages one and two.

So you're looking for paragraph one.

It starts, "The dining room.

." to the end of paragraph two which finishes, "Themselves." So you are just reading those stage directions.

And when you have finished reading, I would like you to discuss please, how does Priestley's description of the dining room compare to the previous image? So you might wanna go back and look at that image.

And do you notice any similarities or differences? Okay, so lots to be getting on with there.

So pause the video, get reading and discussing.

Off you go.

Okay, excellent.

So I'm going to share some of our responses there just to really think about those stage directions and what Priestley is doing with the setting, okay.

And you may have thought about some similarities and differences for that image too.

So Priestley uses the description of the dining room and setting to reveal the life of the Birlings and also their priorities.

Okay, so we get a real sense of who the Birlings are through this setting and their priorities.

So for example, there's this really key description here of the furniture.

It's described as substantial, so like hefty and comfortable.

And these words are really evocative.

They really suggest wealth and a focus on material success.

So I think Priestley has been really intentional here in how he has described that furniture, the substantial and comfortable furniture.

There's also this sense of formality, isn't it? There's a real formal description of the setting here and I think this reflects the lack of warmth or intimacy in their family life.

And again, if we think back to that image, it's very formal, very grand.

It's not cosy or homely, and that's even stated by Priestley.

So I think there's something there about this lack of warmth and intimacy.

The setting could suggest that they prioritise appearance and status over personal connection, that grand dining room.

And it also creates a sense of control and security, which contrasts with later events.

So if we think, again, back to the furniture, they're substantial and comfortable, there's this idea of security, this idea of control, the wealth, you know, makes them feel secure.

But we know that later on as the play progresses, this is kind of shaken, isn't it? All of this security and this sense of control is really challenged.

Now interestingly, and a really interesting decision from Priestley, the Birlings' dining room is the only setting used throughout the entire play.

Now, before I give you the answers, I'd like you to discuss, please, why do you think Priestley made this choice? So pause the video to give yourself time to answer that question or think quietly to yourself.

Off you go.

Well done, everyone, some really excellent ideas there and some very good guesses for those of you that were unsure, so well done.

So things that you may have considered are: This sense of isolation.

So if we think about it, it's kind of like this tiny world, isn't it? This microcosm.

So the dining room symbolises the Birling family's closed, self-centered world.

They are at the centre of their world, that isolation.

It could also create tension.

So that single setting creates a feeling of almost confinement, possibly highlighting the character's trapped guilt.

And when we think of the inspector's arrival, again, that tension in that single room is really high, isn't it? It's really tense.

Everyone in that room discussing everything and finding out everyone's business.

And also perhaps class as well because I think Priestley may choose to only have the play set in the dining room to emphasise the wealth and class which is directly challenged by the inspector.

So we're continually reminded of who the Birlings are and what they represent.

Now it's over to you to complete this sentence by picking the correct answers.

So the furniture in the Birlings' house is described as A, B, C, D? Pick your answers now.

Okay, bit of a sneaky one that because actually, there are two answers out there.

It is good and solid.

Okay, so the furniture in the Birlings' house is described as good and solid.

Now we have some more images here, okay, and I'd like you to discuss how do these images link to the description of the setting and what do they suggest to the audience? So you may just want to go back to the text and remind yourself of those stage directions and the description of setting.

And then think about those images and how they link to the description of the setting and what do they suggest to the audience.

So as always, pause the video to get ready to discuss those questions or think to yourself.

Off you go.

Okay, great, should we share some of our ideas 'cause I heard some really excellent things being said there, so let's share some of those.

So you may have considered that Priestley purposely describes there's champagne glasses, port, and dessert plates.

There's actually quite a long list of things there, isn't there? And this really sets up the celebratory atmosphere, don't we? So we know that there's this engagement party happening and it's, you know, the table strewn with champagne glasses, port, and dessert.

So Priestley establishes this idea of celebration, but it also highlights and reflects the Birlings' wealth and upper class lifestyle, doesn't it? I don't know about you, but when I hear the word champagne, port, and dessert plates, I can't help but thinking of a wealthier and upper class family.

And I think Priestley does this intentionally so that we have this idea in our head.

And then finally, it could be this idea of status, you know, reflecting their desire to showcase status and impress others.

Now, we know from reading the play that Mr. Birling is incredibly keen to impress Gerald Croft, isn't he? And the engagement and he wants to show and he continually refers to his status and his wealth.

So I think the inclusion of these things, like the champagne glasses, really emphasises that.

And it also emphasises their indulgence and their materialism, how they are able to be indulgent and materialistic because of their wealth.

And then finally, this really sets up a contrast with the inspector's moral questioning later, doesn't it? We've got this celebratory, indulgent, materialistic setting, and we know that is gonna be challenged as soon as the inspector arrives.

There's a real contrast there.

Okay, so there's some more images.

So how do these images link to the description of the setting? Again, you might want to go back and look at the setting.

So how do these images link to the description of the setting and why has Priestley included this specific detail in the stage directions? Okay, so pause the video and we'll share your answers in a moment.

Off you go.

Okay, great, so lots of you picking up what these images represent.

So Priestley also describes the lighting in his stage direction and it really reflects the changes in mood and in turn reflects these kind of power dynamics between the Birlings and Gerald Croft and the inspector.

So the lighting really shows that.

So initially, Priestley wants the lighting to be pink, okay? So we get this sense of this comfortable atmosphere, this sense of security.

It's celebratory so he wants it to be pink and he says later on intimate.

But what's interesting is Priestley also states that he wants the lighting to change to be brighter.

And also he then describes he wants it to be harder as well, so a harsher light when the inspector arrives, signalling in tension, and it's almost like the lights are being turned on the Birlings as they are being interrogated.

And this shift in lighting mirrors the disruption of the Birlings' comfortable world.

So if you can imagine like a light being shined in your eye, it almost reflects how the Birlings' feel this bright light being shined on them.

But it also represents this idea that they're being exposed, this light is exposing them, as does the inspector.

It's really quite clever, really.

So true or false time.

Priestley describes the lighting as initially pink and also intimate.

Is that true or false? Give me your answer now, please.

And a very well done to everyone that said that that was true.

But you need to justify why that statement is true.

So give me your answer now, please.

Okay, fantastic.

Let's share.

So the pink lighting creates a warm, soft atmosphere, suggesting comfort and security.

This is contrasted later on with the arrival of the inspector and a harder, more exposing light.

So we're now at our first practise tasks.

Well done, everyone.

You're doing really well.

So we've got three statements here from our pupils.

Let's read through the statements together.

So the first is, "The setting shows that the Birlings are wealthy and enjoy a comfortable lifestyle." Second, "The setting creates a sense of false security and control, which is disrupted by the inspector." And finally, "The setting emphasises the Birlings' focus on appearance rather than genuine relationships." What I want you to do with those statements is I would like you to annotate them, please.

So make notes around them with evidence from the text and explanations that support them.

So think about everything we've looked at so far in this lesson and use that to annotate these statements.

So make sure you've got everything you need to complete this task.

And when you are ready, pause the video to give yourself time to do that.

Off you go.

Great, thank you, everyone, for your hard work.

That is really fantastic and you're really showing me that you're starting to understand the importance of setting.

So I'm going to give you an example of a completed statement.

So you may want to take this opportunity to reflect on your own work, you may wish to add some things or to change it, but let's just read those ideas.

So the statement here is, "The setting emphasises the Birlings' focus on appearance rather than genuine relationships." And I've put here that it is described as homelike, excuse me, let me start that again.

Described as not homelike, nor cosy, so not homelike nor cosy.

And this suggests a formal impersonal space, more about status than warmth.

So I've got my quotations there and an explanation.

And ,"The setting shows that the Birlings' value outward appearances and wealth over meaning connections." And then finally, "Reflects their moral detachment, which will be challenged throughout the play as they are forced to confront their actions and responsibility." So just take a few moments just to check your own annotations and check that they have both quotations and explanations.

Pause the video just to give yourself time to do that.

Off you go.

Okay, so we are already at the second part of our lesson.

So we've thought about setting and now we're going to move on to think about those all important stage directions and characterization.

So like the setting, Priestley uses specific and detailed stage directions to develop characterization.

So you may have noticed from the exploration of setting, Priestley's stage directions are so detailed.

He's got a really clear idea of setting and characterization.

So even before any words are spoken, so any dialogue, Priestley establishes the characterization of the Birlings and Gerald in the stage directions.

And I think that's a really interesting point.

So before anyone even speaks, any of the characters speak, we get a really clear idea of the sorts of people, the characterization of these characters.

So I'd like you, please, just to reread the stage directions at the start of Act 1.

So these are on pages one and two, but you're starting at paragraph two which starts, "At.

." to the end of paragraph two, "Themselves." So it's just that paragraph we are looking at there.

And I want you to consider as you read how Priestley presents the characters.

So pause the video to give yourself time to read that short section now, please.

Great, so hopefully we have lots of ideas there 'cause they'll be coming in useful later.

I'd like to first focus specifically on Mr. Birling.

So he is described as both, you may have noticed these keywords, portentous and provincial.

Okay, portentous and provincial, two P's, okay.

And Priestley specifically uses these words to describe Mr. Birling.

Now, if you don't don't know what they mean, portentous is used to describe someone who is overly serious, self-important, or arrogant.

Okay, so we can start to see how Mr. Birling is being presented.

And provincial refers to something related to a specific regional area.

So it often suggests narrow or limited views or being unsophisticated.

So if you call someone provincial, you're very often referring to their limited views rather than where they are from.

And like I said, Priestley has made a specific choice in these words, okay? There's a reason he has picked those words and it really helps to establish Mr. Birling's characterization as overconfident and arrogant.

So before Mr. Birling even speaks, that word portentous highlights Mr. Birling's pompous self-important nature, suggesting he believes his views are crucial and infallible.

And we know that straight away, don't we, from Mr. Birling.

You know, this idea that he's narrow-minded is implied by that word provincial.

So this really highlights his limited backward outlook.

You know, he's kind of stuck in time, isn't he? And again, it's typical of someone who clings to kind of outdated and conservative views, which is something that Priestley is critiquing here.

The reason he set his play in 1912 is he wanted to challenge these kind of historical and conservative views, also that contrast with other characters.

Okay, so that portentous and provincial description really sets up a stark contrast between Mr. Birling and the more open-minded and socially aware characters like Sheila and Eric.

Okay, so let's see how much you remember.

So which words are used to describe Mr. Birling in the opening stage directions? Pick your answers now.

Okay, who's feeling confident? Lots of you.

Great.

The answers are provincial and portentous.

Now you may notice here that A, there is the word pretentious there, which sounds very similar to portentous, doesn't it? But it's really important that you don't get those two words mixed up because portentous really refers to the idea of someone who is arrogant, you know, pompous, self-important, which is what Mr. Birling is.

Okay, so task B now, and this is over to you now.

We've just looked at Mr. Birling, but now I would like you to consider the other characters mentioned at the start of the play.

Okay, so all of the other characters that are mentioned at the start of the play.

And I would like you, please, to identify the keywords used in the opening stage directions to describe them.

And then I would like you to discuss why do you think Priestley chose these words specifically to describe the character and how does it establish their characterization? So exactly what we've just done with Mr. Birling, you are now going to do with those other characters in the opening stage directions.

So everyone ready to get started? Brilliant.

So pause the video, identify those keywords and get discussing.

Off you go.

Great, some excellent discussions happening there.

Should we look at some answers? Okay, great.

So I'm gonna feed back some of these answers, so hopefully you have something similar.

You may have something different, which is fine, but it's a good opportunity just to compare your findings.

So with Mrs. Birling, we have these keywords here, cold and superior.

Again, they really give us an idea of what she's like.

These words really suggest that kind of lack of empathy and emotional detachment, which we see later on in the play.

And this sense of social dominance and belief in her own moral authority, this idea that she's superior.

So again, before this character's even spoken, we get a real sense of their characterization.

Sheila is described as pretty, pleased, and excited.

So we get this sense of her youthful appearance and initial superficiality, which Sheila is at the start.

You know, there's this idea of naivety and eagerness and unaware of the challenges ahead.

So Sheila really goes on a journey throughout this play, doesn't she? But at the start, we see her as this excitable and pretty person that is completely unaware.

Gerald is described as attractive, well-bred, and a man about town, which, again, very interesting when we think about what we learn about Gerald later on.

So we know that he has charm and appeal, so this makes him likeable and respected, but there is a hint at this upper class upbringing in well-bred, and this idea that he has these polished manners.

And that man about town suggests that he has kind of social confidence and experience, that he goes out, you know, he does all those kind of social things, that he's well known about town.

Now, Eric's description is really interesting because we get both shy and assertive.

So we get these real two contrasting words there.

And I think this is really important for Eric's characterization because it shows us how complex he is and it hints at his internal struggles.

You know, he's awkward, he's insecure, but does it hint perhaps to the potential to challenge and to change, okay, that he is both shy and assertive, so there is this hint at potential there.

Okay, well done, everyone.

We've looked at setting, we've looked at characterization, we're now going to think about this idea of naturalistic versus theatrical delivery.

Now interestingly, there has been some debate between theatre directors and critics about whether the play should be presented naturalistically or theatrically, okay? And Priestley actually had some opinions on this himself too.

And he felt that at times, some of the productions weren't presented in a way that did justice to the play.

I want us to think about this idea of whether it should be naturalistic or theatrical.

So I'd like you, please, to read the inspector's final speech in Act 3, which can be found on pages 56 to 57, and you're looking at paragraph five "You're offering.

." to the end of the paragraph eight, "Swallows." Okay, and I'd like you to read these aloud and I'd like you to try delivering that speech in both a naturalistic and a theatrical way, okay? So remember theatrical, you're very exaggerated, you use exaggerated gestures and words, whereas naturalistic, much more subdued, much more kind of natural in your presentation.

And when you've done that, I'd like you to discuss, please, which way do you think delivers Priestley's message most effectively? Is it the naturalistic way or the theatrical way? Pause the video and I can't wait to hear what you come up with.

Off you go.

Excellent, I loved hearing those deliveries of that inspector's final speech.

It is such an important speech in Act 3.

So it was lovely to hear you all experimenting with the delivery.

Well done.

So here is what some of our Oak pupils thought about which suited it better, the naturalistic or the theatrical delivery.

So hopefully, you've had a chance to think of your own responses.

So I think the naturalistic delivery works better 'cause it makes the inspector seem like a real person and his speech more genuine.

If the actors play it too theatrically, the message might feel exaggerated or less believable, which may lose the impact of Priestley's message.

Hmm, that's a good point, isn't it? Whereas this person says, "I think a theatrical delivery highlights the power and authority of the inspector.

A more dramatic performance can make the audience feel the weight of Priestley's message, emphasising the urgency of social responsibility." So two interesting ideas there.

And it is interesting when we look at that final speech in Act 3 because the language itself is very dramatic, isn't it, very extreme.

So it is easy to understand why people think a theatrical delivery may be more appropriate, but then perhaps maybe this naturalistic delivery makes it more believable.

I don't know, what did you think? So true or false.

If you deliver a performance in a naturalistic way, you might exaggerate gestures, expressions, and speech to create a more dramatic and impactful effect.

Is that true or false? Give me your answer now, please.

Well done everyone that said false.

I think there are quite a few of you, but now you need to tell me why that statement is false.

Give me your answers now, please.

Okay, so lots of you have noticed that actually that statement describes a theatrical delivery.

A naturalistic performance aims to portray characters realistically.

So that's why that statement is false.

Okay, so we have reached the final task of our lesson, okay? And this is over to you to do some reading aloud.

So I would like you please to read aloud the final part of Act 3, pages 70 to 72.

So from paragraph two, "As he.

." to the very end of the play.

And I'd like you to try a naturalistic and a theatrical delivery, so try both, and then I'd like you to answer the following questions.

How did the stage directions help you in your reading of this part of the play? And which delivery, naturalistic or theatrical, do you think was more effective in presenting Priestley's message? So that second question again, which delivery, naturalistic or theatrical, do you think was more effective in presenting Priestley's message? Okay, I am very much looking forward to these naturalistic and theatrical performances and readings.

So when you are ready, pause the video and off you go.

Excellent, thank you so much.

I loved hearing those performances and hearing all the different versions of those final moments of the play.

So very well done.

So we have Jun's answer here to question one, and I just want you to think how far does it align with your own thoughts? So here, we're thinking about how did the stage directions help you in your reading of this part of the play? So Jun has said that, "I found the stage directions gave me clues about the characters' internal states." That's such a good point from Jun because actually the stage directions really help with that.

They give us clues about what's happening inside the characters.

"So for example, the description of Mr. Birling imitating the inspector showed that he didn't take the visit seriously.

I delivered the line in a mocking and confident way to show this when reading aloud." I think that's a really good point from Jun there.

That final part where Mr. Birling, you know, it says he imitates the inspector, he is almost mocking the inspector there, isn't he? And again, it links back to this overconfidence of Mr. Birling.

And here is the answer to question two.

So this is all about that naturalistic or theatrical delivery and which one you thought was more effective in presenting Priestley's message.

So again, here is Jun's answer, think about how it aligns with your own thoughts.

So Jun says, "I think the naturalistic delivery would be more effective.

The stage directions refer to the inspector's solidity and purpose, emphasising the inspector's power.

And I think a naturalistic performance would show this well.

the naturalistic delivery would make the characters seem more real and relatable, which would make the message about social responsibility more impactful.

When the characters react in a more genuine way, the audience can feel the tension and their guilt more strongly." Some really thoughtful, excellent response from Jun there.

You may have something different and that is absolutely fine.

That's kind of the beauty of plays.

You know, a director's interpretation can go either way, can't it? And Priestley doesn't explicitly say whether it should be naturalistic or theatrical.

So there isn't a right answer to that.

So well done, everyone.

We are now at the end of our lesson.

So let's just remind ourselves of everything we have looked at.

We know that Priestley uses the setting to establish the Birlings' wealth and upper class lifestyle.

The setting reveals the importance of status and appearance and how this is challenged by the inspector.

Priestley uses specific and detailed stage directions to develop characterization.

We know that when reading a play, the important stage directions can help develop our understanding of a character and their internal states, and that the play could be presented in a naturalistic or theatrical way.

Very well done, today.

I have really enjoyed this lesson and really thinking about all of those key characters in "An Inspector Calls." I hope to see you all again in another lesson soon.

Until then, I'll say goodbye.

Goodbye.