To what extent is Gerald an untrustworthy character? Gerald is presented as untrustworthy to a degree in ‘An Inspector Calls’. Although, it can be argued that Gerald is a character who represents the upper classes, and embodies everything Priestley wanted to warn audiences about, Gerald does also demonstrate some kindness and love. From the opening Gerald is described in the stage directions as ‘well-bred’ and a ‘man about town’. Priestley wants the audience to see Gerald as both privileged and typical of his gender. ‘Man about town’ could easily be seen as a euphemism for the behaviour of men in Edwardian times. Whilst keeping the outward appearance of of a respectable businessman, his deception to both Daisy Renton and Sheila is made possible by the values of the time. Gerald is able to use his position of power, as a wealthy male, to ‘keep’ Daisy as a mistress. It is possible that Daisy wanted to believe in the ‘love’ and kindness Gerald showed her, even though she knew ‘it couldn’t last’. He uses Daisy as a commodity and is barely any different to Mr Birling in this respect. This deceptive side of Gerald is foreshadowed in the opening of the play, but is not revealed until the second Act. Gerald epitomises everything that is ‘on show’ during the Birling dinner party. The engagement is later revealed as false. However, this is unknown to the audience at the time Sheila tries to quiz Gerald on where he was last summer. Mrs Birling, as an older woman and much more aware of the ways of men, and tells her she will have to get used to men spending their time and energy on their ‘business’. Again, Priestley uses a euphemism to describe Gerald’s business as fulfilling his own sinful pleasures in secret. As well as symbolising gender inequality, Gerald also conveys Priestley’s portrayal of class inequality. The Birlings have gathered in ‘black tie’ dress for the party. This is an overly formal style of dress for the occasion and clearly done to impress Gerald and his family’s connections. Birling aspires to move up the social order of 1912 Britain. Priestley seemed to be highly critical of this hypocrisy - the idea that wealth and class demanded respect and honour. Gerald’s behaviour is far from honorable. It could be suggested that it was his betrayal of Daisy, to maintain his respected exterior, that placed her in a highly vulnerable position. Gerald’s response to the death of Eva Smith suggests that he is perhaps shocked by his own behaviour. He states he is ‘rather more - upset - by this business’. The repetition of the word ‘business’ reveals the duality of respectable society. Furthermore, the use of the dashes illustrate his inability to communicate his feelings properly to the Birlings or Sheila. It is possible that Gerald felt genuine love for the ‘different’ and ‘pretty’ girl. Perhaps Priestley is conveying Gerald’s inability to trust even himself, and that he fell for someone he shouldn’t have. The relationship does not last as his own position in society becomes ultimately more important to him. In a final insult to the memory of the dead girl, in the denouement of the play, Gerald uses his connections to reveal the false identity of the Inspector. While this seems a cause for celebration, it is possible to argue that Priestley intended the audience to understand the dramatic irony of Gerald’s information. He missed the final speech of the Inspector and the play’s central message of social responsibility. Whereas, Sheila and Eric have been changed by their experiences, and understand the need to protect the ‘million and millions of Eva Smiths and John Smith’, Gerald is still looking to protect himself and his own reputation. He, along with the Birlings, represent everything that Priestley felt needed to be changed in society.