Character Profile: Eric Birling

Eric Birling is one of the most compelling and complex characters in An Inspector Calls by J. B. Priestley. As the only son of the wealthy Birling family, Eric begins the play as an awkward, immature young man — overshadowed by his father’s confidence and his sister’s sharpness. But by the end, he becomes one of Priestley’s strongest voices for moral awareness and social responsibility. Understanding Eric’s journey is essential to understanding Priestley’s wider message about guilt, growth, and the possibility of change.

Eric at the Start: Awkward, Uneasy, and Out of Place

When Eric first appears, Priestley’s stage directions describe him as “in his early twenties, not quite at ease, half shy, half assertive.” This mix of insecurity and defiance immediately suggests that Eric is uncomfortable in his own environment — uncertain of who he is or where he belongs in his family’s self-satisfied world.

His drinking problem becomes evident early on. Sheila teases him, “You’re squiffy,” hinting that heavy drinking is already part of his routine. His awkwardness and drinking are symptoms of something deeper: alienation. Eric doesn’t fit neatly into the confident, capitalist mold of his father. While Arthur Birling boasts about “a man has to make his own way,” Eric’s unease signals his inability — or refusal — to accept that worldview.

This early discomfort foreshadows his eventual rejection of his family’s complacency. Unlike his father and Gerald, Eric is not at home in the system that privileges him.

Eric’s Involvement with Eva Smith: Ignorance and Guilt

As the Inspector’s investigation unfolds, it’s revealed that Eric’s connection to Eva Smith (also known as Daisy Renton) is both tragic and shameful. He met her in a bar, was drunk, and admits that he forced himself on her: “I was in that state when a chap easily turns nasty.”

This confession is one of the most disturbing moments in the play. Priestley doesn’t excuse Eric’s actions — he portrays them as exploitative and immoral. Yet, he uses Eric’s wrongdoing to highlight how privilege and carelessness can destroy lives. Eric didn’t act out of deliberate cruelty, but his thoughtlessness still caused real harm.

When Eva became pregnant, Eric tried to help her by giving her stolen money — taken from his father’s company. His actions compound his guilt, showing how his good intentions are undermined by irresponsibility. But unlike his parents, Eric owns his mistakes. He confesses fully, refuses to hide behind social respectability, and admits his guilt: “The fact remains that I did what I did.”

This acceptance of responsibility marks the beginning of his moral awakening.

Eric and His Parents: Generational and Moral Conflict

Eric’s strained relationship with his parents reveals one of the play’s central conflicts — the clash between generations. His father values profit and reputation above all else, insisting that “a man has to look after himself and his own.” Eric, however, grows increasingly frustrated by this cold individualism.

The most powerful confrontation comes when Eric turns on his mother. Earlier, Mrs. Birling had condemned the unknown father of Eva’s child, insisting, “He should be made to confess in public his responsibility.”

When she learns that the man is Eric, her hypocrisy is exposed. Eric’s reaction is bitter and heartbreaking: “You killed her — and the child she’d have had — my child — your own grandchild — you killed them both — damn you, damn you.”

This raw outburst captures Eric’s anguish, guilt, and disgust at his parents’ moral blindness. It also represents the wider generational divide Priestley wants to expose — the older generation’s hypocrisy versus the younger generation’s capacity for self-reflection and change.

Eric’s Transformation: Accepting Responsibility

Eric’s transformation by the end of the play is striking. He begins as immature and defensive but becomes clear-sighted and principled. When the possibility arises that the Inspector was not a real officer, Mr. and Mrs. Birling are eager to dismiss everything that happened. Eric refuses: “And I say the girl’s dead and we all helped to kill her — and that’s what matters.”

This is one of the play’s defining statements of moral truth. For Eric, the lesson is not about legality or exposure but about conscience. Priestley’s message is clear: social responsibility isn’t conditional on being caught — it’s a moral duty that exists because our actions affect others.

Eric, like Sheila, learns what his parents cannot — that empathy and accountability are essential for a just society.

A Flawed but Hopeful Figure

Eric Birling is both tragic and redemptive. His actions contribute to Eva Smith’s suffering, yet his remorse and honesty mark him as a symbol of hope. Priestley uses Eric to show that moral strength lies not in denying guilt but in confronting it. As Eric himself insists, “We all helped to kill her — and that’s what matters.”

Through Eric, Priestley delivers a timeless message: change begins with acknowledgement, and true progress comes when we take responsibility for how our actions shape the lives of others