How Bernard Shaw Accurately Depicted His Era in Pygmalion - Book Report/Review Example

How Bernard Shaw Accurately Depicted His Era in Pygmalion Introduction The play Pygmalion by Bernard Shaw carries in itself a number of themes that depicted his era in Pygmalion. The play encompasses the following themes that are evident throughout the play; (a) the social classes within Pygmalion and in particular the upper class are based on the background and wealth, (b) education is the main thing to distinguish the various classes in Pygmalion, and (c) there was a popular belief at that period that individuals cannot move from one social class to the other in Pygmalion. The differences of the social classes in regard to education, economic status, and the position in the society are quite evident in the play as it will be demonstrated. Body The play Pygmalion gives an illustration of the differences and the tensions between the lower and the upper class. There was a general belief in that era that an individual is born into a particular class and the individual cannot move from one class to the other. Bernard Shaw believed that an individual’s personality is not determined by birth. Instead, Shaw had the thought that someone can accomplish social change if he or she can believe in themselves. In the play, the obstacles between the classes are not natural and they can be broken. Alfred Doolittle and Eliza live in deplorable conditions and they give a representation of the working class. The scenarios that happen to Eliza and her father indicate the Shaw’s belief that individuals are capable of improving their lives by their efforts, but they have to take into consideration the changes in their character. Thus, it is not absurd to note that the difference between the flower girl and the lady lies in the lady’s treatment rather than her behavior. “THE MOTHER I heard you call him by it. Don’t try to deceive me. THE FLOWER GIRL [protesting] Whos trying to deceive you? I called him Freddy or Charlie same as you might yourself if you was talking to a stranger and wished to be pleasant. [She sits down beside her basket].” (Classic Reader 1). The Alfred’s character depicts that he is content being poor and not happy when rich. “DOOLITTLE [unabashed] Can’t afford them, Governor. Neither could you if you was as poor s me. Not that I mean any harm, you know. But if Liza is going to have a bit out of this, why not me too?” (The EServer Drama Collection 1). Similarly, Doolittle expresses the difficulty in changing one’s entire personality. When he acquires wealth, he conforms to the ways of the upper class and fears to be associated with the lower class. Instead of the depicted development, an individual is supposed to create his or her own personal and flexible behavior code. The upper class regards wealth and background as decisive and they are devoted to preserve the class distinctions. The upper class in the play is represented by Eynsford Hills and they appear to be dishonest towards themselves. They prefer living in illusions rather than in reality. This can be asserted by the fact that Eynsford Hills does not have money and they refuse to earn their own living. At the end of the play, Clara is seen as an exception because she decides to take a realistic and honest look at her life (123mehelp.com 1). “CLARA. It’s all a matter of habit. Theres no right or wrong in it. Nobody means anything by it. And it’s so quaint, and gives such a smart emphasis to things that are not in themselves very witty. I find the small talk delightful and quite innocent” (Bartleby.com 1). The play shows the differences in attitudes of the social classes; a good example is the reaction by Eliza towards the Note Taker. “THE NOTE TAKER [explosively] Woman: cease this detestable boohooing instantly; or else seek the shelter of some other place of worship. THE FLOWER GIRL [with feeble defiance] I’ve a right to be here if I like, same as you.” (The Pennsylvania State University 15). The description of the two key characters sharply contrast; the man is educated and the woman is depicted as ignorant; the man is expressed as intelligent and the woman stupid; the man is depicted as reasonable and the woman emotional. From the play the male protagonist is a misogynist; this is well illustrated by his conservation with Pickering in Act 2. “Pickering: Excuse the straight question, Higgins. Are you a man of good character where women are concerned? Higgins: [moodily] Have you ever met a man of good character where women are concerned? Picking: Yes, very frequently. Higgins: [dogmatically, lifting himself on his hands to the level of the piano, and sitting on it with a bounce] Well, I haven’t. I find that the moment I let a woman make friends with me, she becomes jealous, exacting, suspicious, and a demand nuisance. I find that the moment I let myself make friends with a woman, I become selfish and tyrannical. Women upset everything. When you let them into your life, you find that the woman is driving at one thing and you drive at another.” (Lihua 42). The superiority of Higgins is constantly challenged by the Eliza’s wisdom and he gets irritated when he begins to see that Eliza has many unique ideas that he could have not put them into her head; this is because he is not in possession of them and cannot understand them. Example, the Eliza’s talking of her actual education begins when Pickering calls her Miss Doolittle the day they meet each other for the first time (Lihua 43). “HIGGINS. How can she? She’s incapable of understanding anything. Besides, do any of us understand what we are doing? If we did, would we ever do it? PICKERING. Very clever, Higgins; but not sound sense. [To Eliza] Miss Doolittle-” (The Pennsylvania State University 28). Higgins accepts to take Eliza as his equal when Eliza comes into realization and declares that she possesses some knowledge which Higgins does not have and he will never possess; the knowledge Eliza possesses is the knowledge of the ways to be civil and kind to the people. She also asserts that she will become a better and more effective teacher than Higgins (Lihua 43). “LIZA [defiantly non-resistant] Wring away. What do I care? I knew you’d strike me some day. [He lets her go, stamping with rage at having forgotten himself, and recoils so hastily that he stumbles back into his seat on the ottoman]. Aha! Now I know how to deal with you. What a fool I was not to think of it before! You can’t take away the knowledge you gave me. You said I had a finer ear than you. And I can be civil and kind to people, which is more than you can. Aha! That’s done you, Henry Higgins, it has. Now I don’t care that [snapping her fingers] for your bullying and your big talk. I’ll advertize it in the papers that your duchess is only a flower girl that you taught, and that she’ll teach anybody to be a duchess just the same in six months for a thousand guineas. Oh, when I think of myself crawling under your feet and being trampled on and called names, when all the time I had only to lift up my finger to be as good as you, I could just kick myself.” (The Pennsylvania State University 82). The emancipation for education by Eliza and money by her father comes in when the socio-political context of both of them changes and the emancipation is followed by the change in behavior. After the development of Eliza, she gives up the former commonness and vulgarity and she grows into a characteristic petite bourgeoisie who judges the world based on her and no longer fits for the gutter jobs. Doolittle joins the middle class and he is disturbed by the care for respectability for the entire span of his life. It is imperative to note that Doolittle and Eliza express disapproval of the changes that have happened in their situation (Suleiman 33). “LIZA. I can’t. I could have done it once; but now I can’t go back to it. Last night, when I was wandering about, a girl spoke to me; and I tried to get back into the old way with her; but it was no use… DOOLITTLE [sadly] Intimidated, Governor. Intimidated. Middle class morality claims its victim. Won’t you put on your hat, Liza, and come and see me turned off?” (Bartleby.com 1). Conclusion The play Pygmalion offers a vivid description of the various social classes and the differences between each of the social class. The upper class, middle and the lower class are differentiated by their status in education, economic status and the position within the society. Despite the accession to a higher class there is a feeling of ingratitude among the key players such as Eliza and Doolittle. Works Cited “Bernard Shaw (1856-1950). Pygmalion. 1916.” Bartlebay.com. Bartlebay.com, 2011. Web. 26 May 2011. “Bernard Shaw: Pygmalion.” The EServer Drama Collection. The EServer Drama Collection, 2011. Web. 26 May 2011. “Class Differences in Shaw’s Pygmalion.” 123HelpMe.com. 123MeHelp.com, n.d. Web. 26 May 2011. “Full text of ‘George Bernard Shaw’.” Internet Archive. Suleiman, Azher, 2010. Web. 26 May 2011. “Pygmalion by George Bernard Shaw.” Classic Reader. Classic Reader, 2010. Web. 26 May 2011. Lihua, Chen. “A feminist perspective to Pygomalion.” Canadian Social Science 2.2 (2006): 41-44. Print. The Pennsylvania State University. Pygmalion by George Bernard Shaw. Hazleton, PA: Pennsylvania State University, 2004. Print. Read More