Pygmalion

by George Bernard Shaw

This Prestwick House Literary Touchstone Classic includes a glossary and reader's notes to help the modern reader appreciate Shaw's wit and cynicism. In this delightful romance about the man too self-centered to fall in love and the woman too unsure of herself to want more out of life than the little she already has, George Bernard Shaw shakes the dust off the Cinderella story and tells it as only he can. Eliza Doolittle, the Cockney flower girl who wants to work in a flower shop, and Henry Higgins, the phoneticist who turns her into a princess, are no mythological knight and maiden. Instead, even today, they resound with sharp humor and cutting dialogue. Originally published in 1914, Pygmalion invites readers and audience members to examine the roots of social prejudice and the true value of a human being, while also involving them in the improbable lives of Shaw's one-dimensional, yet endearing characters.

From the Publisher

Pygmalion was originally a play written for the stage by George Bernard Shaw in 1913. It was a typical five-act play: Act I taking place in the street outside of Covent Garden Theater; Act II taking place in the library of Henry Higgins s home on Wimpole Street. Act III takes place in the drawing room of Higgins s mother at her at-home. Act IV returns to Higgins s home, and Act V returns to Mrs. Higgins s drawing room. There are, in all, three sets: the London street, Higgins s library, and Mrs. Higgins s drawing room.

The 1913 stage play is the version reproduced in the Prestwick House Literary Touchstone.

It is interesting to note that, after theater audiences and critics complained about the ambiguous ending of the 1913 stage play and the apparent lack of a happy ending, Shaw wrote an epilogue, which is included in the Touchstone edition. In this epilogue, Shaw narrates the events of the years following the close of the play. Eliza marries Freddy. He drops the Eynsford from his name and with financial assistance from Colonel Pickering opens a green-grocer shop. Eliza, also with Pickering s help, opens a florist shop next door to Freddy. The couple remains close friends with the Colonel and Higgins, neither of whom ever marry.

In 1938, Shaw adapted his stage play for the screen. This film version of Pygmalion starred Leslie Howard as Higgins and Wendy Hiller as Eliza. There are several notable differences between the 1913 stage play and the 1938 screenplay. While the stage play has a decidedly Victorian flavor, the screen play is definitely twentieth-century. Whereas in the stage play, Higgins and Pickering intend to take Eliza to an ambassador s garden party, in the screenplay, they take her to an embassy ball.

The movie also presents the scene of Eliza s triumph at the ball, which the play does not. To do so in the play would have required an additional set change, costume changes, and a host of stage extras, all of which Shaw and his producer apparently deemed unnecessary.

Probably the most significant difference between the 1913 stage play and the 1938 screen play, however, is the ending. Shaw s epilogue must not have satisfied the public, as, at the end of the 1938 movie, Eliza returns to Higgins.

It is the 1938 screenplay that served as the basis for the 1956 stage musical and the 1964 movie musical, My Fair Lady. Again, however, there were significant changes. The visit to Mrs. Higgins s home in Act III becomes a visit to the Ascot Racecourse. The role of Eliza s father and his marriage in Act V are greatly expanded. How Eliza spends the night after the embassy ball is expanded, and so on.

Genres: Classics, Plays, Fiction, Drama, Theatre, School, Literature

112 pages, Kindle Edition

First published October 16, 1913

About the author

George Bernard Shaw stands as one of the most prolific and influential intellectuals of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, a man whose literary output was matched only by his fervent commitment to social reform. Rising from a modest background in Dublin to become a global icon of letters, Shaw redefined the purpose of the stage, transforming it from a place of mere entertainment into a forum for rigorous intellectual debate and moral inquiry. His unique "Shavian" style—characterized by sharp-witted dialogue, paradoxical reasoning, and a relentless assault on Victorian hypocrisy—ensured that his voice resonated far beyond the footlights. As a playwright, critic, and philosopher, he remains a singular figure in history, being one of only two individuals to have been honored with both a Nobel Prize in Literature and an Academy Award. This rare crossover of high-art recognition and mainstream cinematic success speaks to his versatility and the enduring relevance of his narratives. His dramatic work, which includes over sixty plays, often tackled the most pressing issues of his day, from the rigid structures of the British class system to the complexities of gender roles and the ethical dilemmas of capitalism. In masterpieces like Pygmalion, he used the science of phonetics to demonstrate the artificiality of class distinctions, a theme that would later reach millions through the musical adaptation My Fair Lady. In Man and Superman, he delved into the philosophical concepts of the "Life Force" and the evolution of the human spirit, while Major Barbara forced audiences to confront the uncomfortable relationship between religious idealism and the industrial military complex. Beyond his theatrical achievements, Shaw was a foundational force in political thought, serving as a leading light of the Fabian Society. His advocacy for gradual socialist reform, rather than violent revolution, helped shape the trajectory of modern British politics and social welfare. He was instrumental in the creation of the London School of Economics, an institution that continues to influence global policy and economic theory. Shaw was also a formidable critic, whose reviews of music and drama set new standards for the profession, characterized by an uncompromising honesty and a deep knowledge of the arts. His personal lifestyle was as distinctive as his writing; a committed vegetarian, teetotaler, and non-smoker, he lived with a disciplined focus that allowed him to remain productive well into his ninth decade. He was a man of contradictions, often engaging in provocative public discourse that challenged the status quo, even when his views sparked intense controversy. His fascination with the "Superman" archetype and his occasional support for authoritarian figures reflected a complex, often elitist worldview that sought the betterment of humanity through radical intellectual evolution. Despite these complexities, his core mission was always rooted in a profound humanitarianism and a desire to expose the delusions that prevented society from progressing. He believed that the power of the written word could strip away the masks of respectability that hid social injustice, and his plays continue to be staged worldwide because the human foibles he satirized remain as prevalent today as they were during his lifetime. By blending humor with gravity and intellect with accessibility, Shaw created a body of work that serves as both a mirror and a compass for modern civilization. His legacy is not just in the scripts he left behind, but in the very way we think about the intersection of art, politics, and the individual’s responsibility to the collective good. He remains the quintessential public intellectual, a man who never feared to speak his mind or to demand that the world become a more rational and equitable place.

Reviews

[Dave Hill · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is fun to read out loud in crazy English accents while stomping around your apartment. The neighbors might not like it but screw 'em.

[Federico DN · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ah-ah-ah-ow-ow-oo!

Exceptional linguist Professor Henry Higgins meets gentleman Colonel Pickering and they whimsically set on crazy bet to pass off Eliza, a low class street flower girl, as a respectable royal lady of the high society. Little do they know Eliza has a few talents of her own.

This was overall enjoyable, although with some reservations. The best of the play was by far Eliza, and the wildly eccentric Alfred Doolitle, they brought light and laughter whenever they appeared; Pickering always the gentleman, and Higgins turning increasingly obnoxious with each passing Act. The whole thing rather good until the bet was finally settled; after that sadly the characters and plot felt rather mediocre, making the last Act V an extremely dull thing to endure and the final resolution between Eliza, Higgins and Pickering utterly disappointing. The epilogue explanation was also the strangest thing, turning away from the normal theater dialogue to full descriptive storytelling, with events that didn’t really add much to the characters or storyline, further aggravating my dislike of an already disappointing ending. To me this play would have greatly benefited from an open ending finishing in Act IV including the revised extended scene with Freddy.

WARNING: There are two versions out there, the Original (1914) and a later Revised edition (1941) with additional notes from the author, more detailed introductions, and extended scenes at the end of each Act, among other things. Personally I prefer the Revised edition, particularly because of the scenes with Nepommuck at the end of Act III, and Freddy at the end of IV.

Another used book found in the dusty family bookcase. A neat find! One of the most famed and highly acclaimed plays of all time, with countless reproductions and adaptations, even as musical and film. Not my cup of tea really, but I believe its fame is well deserved; and though I did not enjoy it much, its potential is easily recognizable and could greatly appeal to certain palates, possibly more refined than mine.

It’s public domain. You can find it HERE. [Original Version]

*** My Fair Lady (1964) is an acceptable adaptation, for a musical at least (I hate them). Reasonably faithful to the book, despite the non-scripted songs. Admirable artistic value and justly deserving of the many awards received. First time watching an Audrey Hepburn movie, must say she really shined and Show Me some terrific acting. Professor Higgins as obnoxious as in the book, so proud of Never Let A Woman In Your Life. Still; With a Little Bit of Luck, you can stomach him. Overall the movie is good I guess, but I couldn’t care less if The Rain in Spain Stays Mainly in the Plain, or if Doolittle Gets to the Church on Time; and I Could Have lived without watching them Dance all Night. Now if only they removed all that awful singing, and A Few Hours in length… Oh Wouldn't It Be Loverly?



-----------------------------------------------
PERSONAL NOTE :
[1914] [82p] [Theater] [2.5] [Conditional Recommendable] [“I shall make a duchess of this draggletailed guttersnipe.”] [“Bly me!”/“By Jove!”/“Bloody hell!”]
-----------------------------------------------

¡Aaaaayyyyy…!

El excepcional lingüista Profesor Henry Higgins conoce al caballeroso Coronel Pickering y caprichosamente se traban en una loca apuesta de hacer pasar a Eliza, una chica de la calle florista y de baja clase, como una respetable dama de pura realeza de la alta sociedad. Poco saben ellos que Eliza guarda algunos talentos propios.

Esto fue dentro de todo disfrutable, aunque con algunas reservas. Lo mejor de la obra fue por lejos Eliza, y especialmente el excéntrico Alfred Doolitle, trayendo luz y risas cuando sea que aparecían; Pickering siempre el caballero, y Higgins volviéndose cada vez más insoportable con cada Acto transcurrido. Todo el asunto bastante bueno hasta que la apuesta fue finalmente saldada; después de eso lamentablemente los personajes y la trama se sintieron bastante mediocres, haciendo el último Acto V una cosa extremadamente aburrida de soportar y la resolución final entre Eliza, Higgins y Pickering tremendamente decepcionante. La explicación del epílogo también fue una cosa muy rara, pasando del normal dialogo teatral a una completa narración descriptiva, con eventos que para mí realmente no añadían mucho a los personajes o la historia, agravando todavía más mi desagrado con un ya decepcionante final. Para mí esta obra se hubiera beneficiado enormemente con un final abierto terminando en el Acto IV incluyendo la revisada escena extendida de Freddy.

ADVERTENCIA: Hay dos versiones allá afuera, la Original (1914) y una posterior edición Revisada (1941) con notas adicionales del autor, más detalladas introducciones, y escenas extendidas al final de cada Acto, entre otras cosas. Personalmente prefiero la versión Revisada, particularmente por las escenas con Nepommuck al final del Acto III, y la de Freddy al final del IV.

Otro libro usado hallado en la polvorienta biblioteca familiar. ¡Un hallazgo interesante! Una de las obras teatrales más afamadas y altamente aclamadas de todos los tiempos, con innumerables reproducciones y adaptaciones, incluso como musical y filme. No es mi taza de té la verdad, pero creo que su fama es bien merecida; y aunque no la disfruté mucho, su potencial es fácilmente reconocible y creo que podría agradar enormemente a ciertos paladares, posiblemente más refinados que el mío.

Es dominio público, lo pueden encontrar ACA. [Versión Original]

*** Mi Bella Dama (1964) es una aceptable adaptación, para un musical al menos (los odio). Razonablemente fiel al libro, a pesar de las canciones. Admirable valor artístico y justamente merecedor de todos los galardones recibidos. Primera vez viendo una película de Audrey Hepburn, y debo decir que realmente brilla y Demuéstrame una actuación fenomenal. El Profesor Higgins tan odioso como en el libro, tan orgulloso de Nunca Dejar Entrar una Mujer en tu Vida. Aun así, Con un Poquito de Suerte, lo podés aguantar. Dentro de todo supongo que la película es buena, pero no podría importarme menos si La Lluvia en España Queda Principalmente en Llanura, o si Doolittle Llega a Tiempo a la Iglesia; y Podría Haber vivido sin verlos Bailado Toda la Noche. Ahora si tan sólo removieran todo ese desagradable canto, y Un Par de Horas en longitud… Oh ¿No Sería Precioso?



-----------------------------------------------
NOTA PERSONAL :
[1914] [82p] [Teatro] [2.5] [Recomendable Condicional] [“Haré una duquesa de esa criatura sacada del arroyo.”]
-----------------------------------------------

[Nataliya · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Eliza has no use for the foolish romantic tradition that all women love to be mastered, if not actually bullied and beaten,"¹ says G.B.Shaw in the afterword to his famous play.

¹By the way, I think this quote should be memorized and repeated on the daily basis by the contemporary authors, especially in the YA genre, who attempt to create female characters. Really. Maybe I can start a campaign encouraging authors' awareness of this quote. Hmmmm...

This was one of the first plays I've ever read, and to this day is one of my favorites. The combination of Shaw's wit and satire with creating an amazingly strong heroine was a treat to read! The play is brilliant, as witnessed by its continuing success - but it's the afterword from the author that ultimately made it into a five-star read. The afterword that takes this story and makes it wonderfully and firmly grounded in reality (even if it's a reality with somewhat outdated early 20th century reasoning).


The many faces of Eliza Doolittle.

Most people know this story, right? If not from reading the play then from seeing the classic Hollywood's production of My Fair Lady musical, right? The 1912 story of a simple London Cockney flower girl Eliza who learns how to speak like a proper British lady from a renown phoneticist (and, honestly, a rather miserable person) Henry Higgins. Both Higgins and Eliza have remarkably strong characters and no wonder that problems ensue (well, because of that and because of the fact that a well-mannered British woman in the early 20th century seemingly did not really have that many choices besides finding herself a man). According to the famous movie, sparks also fly between Eliza and Higgins. But do they, really? In the words of Shaw himself,

"Nevertheless, people in all directions have assumed, for no other reason than that she became the heroine of a romance, that she must have married the hero of it."

And that's where the Audrey Hepburn movie lost me. After all, haven't the movie makers read the famous afterword by Shaw himself (and I honestly think that it's just as interesting as the play itself!), where he painstakingly details the future lives of his characters and destroys every notion of the happily ever after for Eliza and Higgins - the ever-after that was already clearly doomed in the play itself:

"LIZA [desperate]: Oh, you are a cruel tyrant. I can't talk to you: you turn everything against me: I'm always in the wrong. But you know very well all the time that you're nothing but a bully. You know I can't go back to the gutter, as you call it, and that I have no real friends in the world but you and the Colonel. You know well I couldn't bear to live with a low common man after you two; and it's wicked and cruel of you to insult me by pretending I could. You think I must go back to Wimpole Street because I have nowhere else to go but father's. But don't you be too sure that you have me under your feet to be trampled on and talked down. I'll marry Freddy, I will, as soon as he's able to support me."

After all, it would not be in character for Eliza, who is not really a romantic character but a strong, pragmatic, and independent young woman who would not settle for a life of bringing Higgins his slippers (oh, that awful last line of the movie!!!) and being ignored; a woman who is not beyond a well-aimed slippers throw to the face:

"This being the state of human affairs, what is Eliza fairly sure to do when she is placed between Freddy and Higgins? Will she look forward to a lifetime of fetching Higgins's slippers or to a lifetime of Freddy fetching hers? There can be no doubt about the answer. Unless Freddy is biologically repulsive to her, and Higgins biologically attractive to a degree that overwhelms all her other instincts, she will, if she marries either of them, marry Freddy.
And that is just what Eliza did."

No, Eliza Doolittle is not a woman to be ignored. She is a strong, independent and level-headed heroine who has guts and self-worth even before her 'magical' lady-like transformation. She knows what she wants, and she determinedly sets out on the path that she thinks would lead her to her dream - working in a flower shop. She may be comical and pathetic in the beginning - but she knows she's not nothing (unlike the view of her that Henry Higgins has). She stands up for herself even when she is clearly in an unfavorable situation - a woman vs. a man, a social nothing vs. a respected gentleman, a physically weaker creature vs. a physically more intimidating one:

"I won't be called a baggage when I've offered to pay like any lady."

And from the afterword:

"Even had there been no mother-rival, she would still have refused to accept an interest in herself that was secondary to philosophic interests."

And her feeling of self-worth only increases as the horizons of the society open up more for her. She refuses to play second fiddle even to a powerful and intimidating Higgins. The thing is - Higgins, contrary to his belief, did not "create" Eliza, like the famous literary Pygmalion created his Galatea; he merely gave her more power to achieve what she wants. And what she wants does not include being ignored and fetching him his bloody slippers. He is a strong man - well, she is an equally strong woman who will have what's best for her. And even if in the end - the afterword - Eliza's independence is not complete and she continues to owe a lot to the duo of Higgins and Pickering - but again, somehow on her own terms.

"But to admire a strong person and to live under that strong person's thumb are two different things."

This was my first time reading this play in English, and reading it in the language it was intended to be read in highlighted even more the brilliance of Shaw as a playwright and the exquisite humor of it. Shaw skillfully deconstructs the notions of the British class system - and does it with easily felt pleasure and enjoyment, and continues to do so in the afterword, which I enjoyed so much. In the end, it's not about Eliza becoming a lady on Henry Higgins' terms; it's all about the shrewd future florist/greengrocer Eliza, and that's the awesomeness of it. It is an excellent read, a timeless one, thoroughly entertaining and thought-provoking. Easy 5 stars!

"Galatea never does quite like Pygmalion: his relation to her is too godlike to be altogether agreeable."

[Brina · Rating 5 out of 5]

Reposting in honor of George Bernard Shaw's birthday, July 26.

I am writing this review to honor my grandmother who recently passed away. I lost track of the number of times we listened to the soundtrack of My Fair Lady either in her car, her apartment, or my house growing up. To me Eliza Doolittle, Henry Higgins, and Colonel Pickering are as much the actors who played them as they are are the memories I created with my grandmother and great aunt while watching the movie or listening to its timeless songs.

By the time I finally read Pygmalion in script form in eighth grade English class and then subsequently watched the movie in class, I had the entire script memorized. My entire class asked me for assistance in all the assignments associated with this unit, and of course, I demurred. Ask me today, I still have most of the songs memorized, which of course came from Shaw's brilliant script.
My daughters' favorite classic film is My Fair Lady because of the gorgeous costumes they see at Ascot race track and the Royal ball. But what makes this Cinderella story timeless is not the costumes but the prose down to the last line, "Eliza, where the devil are my slippers." For those who have not read this tale or seen the film, take the time to do so. You too could be captivated by Eliza the flower girl turned language pupil and create generations of memories.

[Fergus, Weaver of Autistic Webs · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a buddy read with my marvellous new friend Elinor, and we both had a whale of a time reading it!

And if you go into it thinking you’re in for just a pleasant rerun of My Fair Lady - for the musical is based on this play - THINK AGAIN.

You know, a wonderful author who’s a little younger than I, and who shares my constant cross of Asperger’s Syndrome - her name is Anita Lesko - has written a self-study called When Life Hands you Lemons, Make Lemonade...

Well, that’s what Shaw does.

He imagines all the possible lemons that life can deal a young couple who have fond feelings for one another, and lets ‘em rip!

Then he just smiles and makes some reenergizing lemonade for the lost lovebirds.

Like he’s up to his neck in alligators but only laughs. So WE laugh too.

We all love to read and we all have a very stressful and very largely unpleasant REAL life chock fulla lemons.

Most authors give us the former so we can escape the latter.

Not Shaw!

He rubs our faces in our personal tub of lemons all the time and we’re laughing at his folly.

He’s a realist. But a realist with a Warm Heart.

He’s fantastic.

Before I read this play I thought Shaw was superficial. Not any more!

For when I read the lengthy conclusion of this play, I was wearing a wistful, very human smile.

For he had touched the core of my Heart.

[Meghhnaa (On a Review-Writing Break!) · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pygmalion is a verbose, satirical, romantic play, distributed over 5 Acts, with no scenes!

The play opens with the following preparatory lines-
“It is impossible for an Englishman to open his mouth without making some other Englishman hate or despise him. German and Spanish are accessible to foreigners: English is not accessible even to Englishmen”

I am resistant to above lines, as I am blessed with great English friends, who definitely don’t despise me, but help me to become a better version of myself! 😊

The play focusses on social-class distinction, so maybe GB Shaw, used the above lines as a prop, loosely! I wish, he could have used other tools/examples to exemplify, or made it more of a general approach, than a geographical divide! Coz of the opening lines, in a flash, I deducted 1.5 stars 😊

I couldn’t relate with the lines at all. A human in himself is a complex machinery, irrespective of geographical boundaries! So, I openly defy!!

Pygmalion illustrates the arbitrariness of basing a person’s worth on his/her pronunciation, and the social assumptions of inferiority/superiority in the class system!

The 40-year-old, phonetics professor Henry Higgins, is an expert in dialects/accents. Boasting of educating the social climbers in speech, and phonetically transcribing all that the innocent flower girl Eliza Doolittle says, he teaches Eliza to speak like a lady so that she might be employed in a classy flower store!

A fellow phonetics professor, Colonel Pickering (author of spoken Sanskrit), offers to cover the expenses of the experiment, with the stipulation, if Higgins can pass Eliza off as a duchess at a garden party six months later.

Certain of his abilities, the tyrannical, despotic and condescending Higgins is enticed by the Frankenstein-ian challenge “But you have no idea how frightfully interesting it is to take a human being and change her into a quite different human being by creating a new speech for her. It's filling up the deepest gulf that separates class from class and soul from soul.”

Higgins’ rough manners, rudeness, superciliousness and swearing do not teach her the accompanying social etiquette. Eliza betrays her lack of refinement at a party, by spouting, where she uses the vulgar expression “Not bloody likely,” but in a ladylike manner.

Higgins and Pickering are unaware that their experiment has transformed Eliza, not only in terms of speech, but also in terms of society!

Even after she has successfully passed for a lady at a garden party, Higgins still does not treat her like a lady.

Higgins’s excuse is that while Pickering may treat a flower girl like a duchess, he would also treat a duchess like a flower girl.

He defends himself, by saying that he believes in treating everyone equally, regardless of his/her social class!!

The humiliated and infuriated, Eliza, no longer willing to be treated like a servant, leaves!

She firmly claims that social class is not determined by one’s pronunciation but by the respect with which one is treated!!

In the meantime, unexpected money has been left to Eliza’s father by a rich American, which transformed him from an alcoholic dustman into a middle-class man in terms of behaviour, but not in terms of pronunciation!

Father’s transformation is based on money and not accent, whereas daughter was transformed in terms of accent, but both stay ambivalent about their new status!

Ultimately, Eliza, marries the petit bourgeois(middle-class) Freddy and opens a flower and vegetable shop with him. She rejects continuing the endurance of Higgins’s disdain, tyranny and rudeness. His derisiveness, keeps putting her down throughout!

Eliza scuffles throughout, to liberate herself from the professor’s tyranny, contempt and oppression!

###########################

Pygmalion is one story, enwrapping couple of other stories in it!

GB shaw links the story of “Cinderella” of a transformation from rags to riches, to sprinkling it with a “Frankenstein-ian” creation of a new life.

It is a re-working of Greek mythology, Pygmalion (King of Cyprus) and Galatea.

In the original Greek mythology, Pygmalion, is a sculptor and falls in love with the ivory statute of a beautiful woman, he created. He falls in love with his own creation. On his request, Aphrodite, the goddess of love and beauty, transformed the statute into actual woman by breathing life into the statue. Both get married, and lived happily ever after!! 😊

Pygmalion is the professor Henry Higgins, who creates Galatea, by transforming a common, ignorant, flower girl Eliza into a duchess by creating a new speech for her!

But we witness a Shaw-nian twist, unlike, the Greek mythology, the professor and the flower-girl don’t fall in love with each other. Eliza, marries someone else(Freddy)!

Beauty is a very subjective attribute. In Pygmalion, Eliza, remains the same from the beginning to the end, but is virtually invisible to Freddy as a Cockney-speaking flower merchant girl. Later, he is totally captivated and smitten by what he perceives as her beauty and grace when she is presented to him as a lady of society! True that, beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder!

My favourite lines of the play are-

The essence of appearance and reality, is defined by Eliza/Liza as: “You see, really and truly, apart from the things anyone can pick up (the dressing and the proper way of speaking, and so on), the difference between a lady and a flower girl is not how she behaves, but how she's treated. I shall always be a flower girl to Professor Higgins, because he always treats me as a flower girl, and always will; but I know I can be a lady to you, because you always treat me as a lady, and always will.”

Questions can be raised about the justifiability of social distinction and the role of women in a patriarchal society. Eliza escapes the suffering of humiliation and degradation by Higgins, with the help of Pickering’s civility.

Pygmalion was later adapted into the popular musical comedy My Fair Lady (1956).

I give 3.5 stars (disappointed with the opening lines!) to this light-hearted play! I can surely classify it as a one-time read, to derive notions and implement the same in life, on your own accord!

[Candi · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5 stars

"… you have no idea how frightfully interesting it is to take a human being and change her into a quite different human being by creating a new speech for her. It's filling up the deepest gulf that separates class from class and soul from soul."

Even if you are not already familiar with George Bernard Shaw’s play Pygmalion, I’m sure you are likely acquainted with either the on-stage musical version or movie adaptation titled My Fair Lady. I have fond memories of my high school’s production of this classic tale. I adored the music and my favorite scene was the Ascot Races. My fifteen-year old self was thrilled to don the gorgeous dress and feather hat of a lady attending the races. And those lyrics to “I Could Have Danced All Night” still pop into my head on occasion even all these years later (no I most certainly did not play the role of Eliza Doolittle!) Decades later I finally got around to reading the play on which the musical was based.

Professor Henry Higgins is a renowned phoneticist who takes on a bet and an experiment of sorts with Colonel Pickering to turn a common, street-corner flower girl, Eliza Doolittle, into a well-bred lady, simply by changing her language and her dress. The ultimate goal is to pass her off as a ‘duchess’ at the ambassador’s garden party. Eliza, with a dream of owning her own flower shop someday, agrees to the ‘project.’ The ensuing dialogue is sharp and entertaining!

Shaw makes some brilliant statements about social class and gender distinctions through his characters. What I had forgotten, or perhaps it was not as glaringly obvious to me years ago, is that Professor Higgins is a bit of an ass! "Well, when I've done with her, we can throw her back into the gutter; and then it will be her own business again; so that's all right." I had to set aside my dislike and realize that this is one of the points Shaw is trying to get across – societal expectations and the objectification of women, among others. The ability to make change is inherent in each one of us, however, and can provide the freedom necessary to find a better station in life.

My first attempt to actually read George Bernard Shaw was rather a success, although I still prefer actually seeing a play to reading one. Perhaps I just had a bit of nostalgia for this and wanted more of a visual experience. Nevertheless, I’d rate this 3.5 rounded up to 4 stars!

"If I can't have kindness, I'll have independence."

[Lisa · Rating 5 out of 5]

A lot of my reading at the moment seems to revolve around the relationship between art and artist, creator and creation.

Reading other reviews on "Pygmalion", I realise how strange my approach to it was, and how disappointed I was at first because my expectations were not met. I chose it as part of a reading challenge I set myself a couple of years ago - to read all Nobel Laureates in literature. The title appealed to me, and I was thrilled to explore a modernist's take on the ancient myth of Pygmalion. Believe it or not, I had never realised that "My Fair Lady", which I love, is based on this play, and I waited for GREEK characters to show up, as I had been immersing myself in Enlightenment art concerned with the artistic questions raised in the Pygmalion story.

Falconet's sculpture of the misogynistic sculptor falling in love with his own creation, kneeling in front of the carefully chiselled woman, praying to Aphrodite to make her come alive, - that was what I was waiting for!

I kept wondering about the charming cockney and 19th century scientific approach to social class distinctions. I enjoyed the reading experience, but could not make sense of it at all. Don't judge a book by its title, I was inclined to say, until it dawned on me all of a sudden that:

a) Shaw's "Pygmalion" was linked to the musical "My Fair Lady", and

b) Higgins had more than a trace of Pygmalion, in fact was his modern alter ego.

Just like the ancient artist, he did not quite expect the outcome of his experiment, and Eliza Doolittle, like so many other literary creatures, does a beautiful job of emancipating herself from her creator. Art is quite amazing that way: as soon as it enters the world, it has a life of its own, and the artist is forced to watch its development together with other spectators.

I like that idea, as it symbolises the relationship between older and younger generations as well: we are nurtured and shaped by our parents' choices, but when we grow up, the freedom and responsibility is ours.

In a way, Frankenstein and Moreau's monsters in The Island of Doctor Moreau demonstrate the same emancipation process, and I don't think it is a coincidence that artists and writers of the 19th century were obsessed with that theme, as the world went through major political, social, economic and scientific changes.

Shaw showed wonderful creativity when transforming the ancient myth into modern life while keeping the essential questions alive. And his creation lives its own, independent life as well!
Must-read for anyone interested in the eternal human questions, as well as 19th/20th century social history.

Along with O'Neill's "Mourning Becomes Electra", this is my favourite merging of myth and modern drama!

[mwana · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pygmalion: def. n. A sculptor in Greek mythology who created a sculpture so beautiful that he fell in love with her.

In this rendition of an age old story, professor of linguistics Henry Higgins plucks a flower girl off the streets so as to teach her proper diction and middle class manners. After befriending Colonel Pickerson, they wager that by the end of the lessons, the flower girl Eliza Doolittle, will be just as well-mannered as a duchess.

Higgins: I’m an eccentric professor of linguistics. And a confirmed bachelor. Some people say I’m a dick. They aren’t wrong.

Pickerson: I’m another confirmed bachelor. Less dickish than Higgins and for the life of me, I’m actually his bff.

Eliza: Ah-oo-ow-ow for some reason Shaw doesn’t know how women would express anger, excitement, sorrow even if in a cockney accent. I’m basically a broke ass ugly duckling prime for a makeover who sells marked up flowers trying to just survive, you know.

Higgins [writing in a notebook]: Fascinating those squawks you’re making.

Eliza: Dude, don’t nark on me. I aint done nothing.

Crowd: Yeah dude mind your damn business. Oh wait, you are harmless. For fuck’s sake girl, stop your hawing.

Eliza: Bitch, buy some flowers. You’re clearly rich.

They buy some flowers.

Some time later…

Eliza: I’ve come so you can teach me to talk proper and all so I can work at some uppity flower shop.

Higgins: Lmao no.

Pickerson: Could be interesting.

Higgins: Meh

Eliza: ah-he-hi-ho-uh if you will not have me I will not bother.

Higgins’ house manager: Quit it girl. Come get a bath and some new clothes.

Eliza: k

Eliza’s dad: Dudes, I’m broke, you’re rich, gimme some cash and I won’t bring any drama to the fact that you’re training my daughter.

The dudes: k

Months later

Higgins: Mum test this lady I’ve been teaching.

Mrs Higgins: Seriously? I told you not to come over when I’m home and expecting company.

Higgins: But I am an eccentric scholar! You must abide by my demands.

Mrs Higgins: So dramatic. Fine.

Months later...

Higgins: See, we succeeded. You owe me Pickering. I trained her and after the events last night keeping up with the posh folks, Eliza could speak circles around em. She’s simply the best. Takes up new language like a kid raised in a foreign country.

Pickering: You’re not wrong. I'm off to bed.

Higgins: Yeah now she can go and do whatever she wants.

Eliza [mentally]: Is that all I am to you.

Eliza [out loud]: pouts

Higgins: Now where are my slippers.

Eliza: goes to get them and tosses them at him

Higgins: what the fuck is your problem?

Eliza [mentally]: why do you not care about me?

Eliza [out loud]: Bah! Let’s fight.

Higgins: K

Eliza: Peace.

The next morning...

Higgins: Mother Eliza has disappeared. We’re gonna sic the cops on her.

Mrs Higgins: Dude, calm down. She’s here.

Eliza: Let’s fight. You don’t care about me.

Higgins: I don’t care about anyone.

Eliza: Give me kindness or give me independence.

Higgins: You can come back to our digs and life goes on as it was or try your luck back in the gutter I picked you from.

Eliza [having actually forgotten she’s the one who went to Higgins in the first place]: Damn you and your bullying. I’m not coming back. Oh my dad’s gotten a new job and is getting married right this instant. We’re off to the church.

Higgins: I hear you. When you come back life will go on as usual. You’ll do all the assistant stuff you were doing for me.

Eliza: Go fuck yourself. Imma marry that Freddy dude who is friends with your mum. When he is able to provide for me.

Higgins: Bitch please. You’ll be back.

Shaw: I have written hundreds of words explaining my ambiguous ending. Higgins is basically oedipal and holds his mama with the highest regard so no woman could ever compare. But you reader nudge nudge wink wink can see for yourself that he HAS fallen in love with Eliza but she declared that even if Higgins were to ask for her hand in marriage she would say no.

Scholar reviews: This carefully crafted minimalist short play which is likely Shaw's best work is an allegory of the caste system of which Shaw is showing disdain for via Higgins. He is also painting Higgins as a low key socialist. Furthermore, Eliza's courage in standing up to Higgins shows her growth as a student who ends up becoming better than her master. When she threatens to be his business competitor she challenges his socialist ideals by embracing the backbone of capitalism. No, not greed. Competition. But Eliza's independence is curtailed by Higgins trading her compliance for his dismissive friendship which is borderline abusive. This work is really seminal in observing the socio-economic....

Me:

[Murray · Rating 4 out of 5]

👩 Pygmalion is the Greek sculptor who carves a statue out of ivory, a woman he names Galatea. Falling in love with the statue he prays to Aphrodite to grant Galatea life. The goddess does so and sculptor and creation marry to give the world a Greek mythology HEA, a rare enough gift.

Shaw’s spin is to have a Professor of phonetics, Higgins, recreate a woman of the streets and make of her an elegant and refined beauty. But Eliza develops a mind of her own and drops her creator to give her love to another man. This was Shaw’s social commentary & bit of theater meant to elevate the status and independence of women.

My Fair Lady is the musical that is a spin of Shaw’s play but this becomes a romcom where the ending, like the myth, is HEA - Eliza falls for Higgins and sticks with him.

Another take on the myth is the book Galatea you may have seen on Goodreads this past winter and spring.

I like Shaw’s play 🎭 but I never could get into the musical. Too much singing.

[Praveen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Pygmalion was an ancient Greek legend, who was a sculptor and a king. He fell in love with his ivory statue of his own ideal woman. He prayed. In response to his prayer, the Goddess gave life to the statue and then the king married it.

This much of information was sufficient for me to know why the title of this book was chosen by G.B. Shaw, Pygmalion. I very much liked the character of Mr. Higgins in the play. He is a professor and scientist of phonetics and very confident about his knowledge and acumen.

While reading the book I realized that everyone is like Pygmalion. Everyone likes and adores whatever is created by him or her. Three years old daughter of my neighbor first makes a bridge from the cards and then claps and laughs seeing it, and during this spree when someone breaks it or it is shattered by the wind, she weeps. She perhaps loves her creation. Though momentary, she expresses the feelings of love and pain with a unique sort of fervor to those childish maneuvers and efforts. I too was probably like Pygmalion when I was a kid, but unlike this small daughter of my neighbor, I did not feel pain when one day my creation was destroyed!

My creation was a cat made up of snow. When one day there occurred, an event of very heavy snowfall, all houses and trees were covered with the white sheet of snow and remained covered for a few days. I made a sculpture of a cat out of that snow, just outside the window of my room. It was not a replica of a cat, In fact it looked like a small cow, a bit bulky in size and a bit distorted but still it was a cat for me and I had placed a few whiskers of string on its front bulging shape, which according to me was the mouth of my cat, and I inserted two small round glass shooters, a few inches above those whiskers to make them look like eyes of my cat. My this awkward-looking cat remained there just outside the window of my room for two days possibly. There was not at all sunshine for two days. The temperature was below zero and the snow did not melt. I kept watching my cat again and again and adored its ludicrous shape during those two days.

Then the third day Sun shone with all its brilliance and in the very morning time itself, my cat melted away and disappeared. But I did not feel bad as I knew by that time if the snow would be there again, I would recreate my cat again. However, in that season, there was no snowfall again. And in the next season, I was one year older and the Pygmalion within me was now matured enough to make other kinds of creations!
I am talking about all this rubbish because these two events just flashed over my mind when I was reading this play. The character of Prof Higgins was very much like me when I was a kid …. Overconfident and heartless!

I read this book for the first time and this was a wonderful experience. Then I watched the 1938 movie of Leslie Howard as Professor Henry Higgins and Wendy Hiller as Eliza Doolittle and this movie extraordinarily complemented my experience of reading the book.
What a fine movie and wonderful acting by its cast!
The only difference between the play and the movie was its ending. Shaw kept his play realistic but there is a different ending in the movie, there might have been commercial reasons behind this change!

Coming back to the book, there are 5 acts in this play. The beginning of this play is so sweet. Thunders and then rain. People rushing into the shelters…. closing a dripping umbrella… in the street. A street flower girl calling the name of a young man and a mother and daughter asking the street flower girl….

“Now tell me how you know that young gentleman’s name?”

Prof. Higgins, a scientist of phonetics, takes a challenge that he will be able to transform the cockney speaking Covent Garden flower girl, Eliza Doolittle, into a woman as poised and well-spoken as a duchess. He meets his challenge wonderfully.

“There are such fools that they think style comes by nature to people in their position, and so they never learn. There is always something professional about doing a thing superlatively well.”

Higgins is so obsessed with his work and knowledge that he hardly appreciates anything else, whether they are emotions or other trivial felicities of our surroundings. When Liza feels something for him and he denies her. She feels letdown.

Liza: what did you do it for if you didn’t care for me?

Higgins: Why, because it was my job.

Liza: you never thought of the trouble it would make for me.

Higgins: Would the world ever have been made if its maker had been afraid of making trouble. There is only one way of escaping trouble, and that’s killing things. Cowards, you notice, are always shrieking to have troublesome people killed.


Probably many people are already familiar with the story and they have seen many movies based on the play, but for me, this was the first time. Even in my school days, I missed this book, so a highly satisfying five star read for me.

This enriched me on many levels. I am quenched!

[Kenny · Rating 5 out of 5]

The great secret, Eliza, is not having bad manners or good manners or any other particular sort of manners, but having the same manner for all human souls: in short, behaving as if were in Heaven, where there are no third-class carriages, and one soul is as good as another.
Pygmalion ~~ George Bernard Shaw


#9 of my 2018 Shaw Project

Many people consider Pygmalion to be Shaw's best play. I'm not among them (nor is Major Barbara for that matter). With that being said, I adore this script. I do feel it is among George Bernard Shaw's most accessible works.

The basis for the much beloved, happily-ever-after Lerner & Lowe musical, George Bernard Shaw’s 1913 play Pygmalion takes a much firmer tack on questions of class distinctions and female independence. Those themes, so dear to Shaw’s progressive heart, end up rather heartwarmingly watered down in My Fair Lady. But Pygmalion ~~ it is all charmingly amusing and remarkably undated. It is nearly flawless.



Shaw's insistence on language as the vital instrument of power and oppression goes beyond his customary explorations of class, nationalism and feminism.

With story and dialogue by Shaw, there is little to complain about here. Pygmalion is Shaw at his best.



2023 Reread Comments
Pygmalion a beautifully structured play of infinite subtlety ~~ it is a pleasure from start to finish, having lost none of its charm ...

[Piyangie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I watched My Fair Lady about twenty years ago and all I remember is that a linguistic professor taking in a common flower girl to teach her proper language and speech and to improve her behaviour so that she'll become a lady. I didn't know then that the musical was based on the play Pygmalion by Bernard Shaw. I acquired that knowledge very recently. I cannot remember many details of the musical, so the reading of the play was quite fresh.

Pygmalion, the play, is centered on Henry Higgins, a professor of phonetics, and Eliza Doolittle, a common flower girl. Higgins makes it his "project" to reform Eliza and makes her a "duchess". He is successful in his project but he must face certain consequences that were not anticipated.

Under this light storyline, Bernard Shaw exposes a few powerful themes. The major one is speech and language defects in the lower classes of English society. Eliza represents them. Her life story is a blatant example of the lives of men and women of the lower class. Their lack of education and inability to speak proper English made their life circumstances dire. They were confirmed to have very low jobs and to become even a shop assistant is beyond reach. Shaw advocates the value of education irrespective of gender.

Another is the class difference and attitude of the higher classes toward the low class. Professor Higgins represents a higher class. His treatment of Eliza and the likes generally shows that the class Higgins represents does not see the likes of Eliza as humans with feelings. They are only mere objects to be used and then sent to the "gutter" as Professor Higgins so shamelessly states.

Finally, Shaw addresses the issue of women's position in English society. Eliza is a "project" for Higgins, and he keeps her in the house without any thought to her future. And when his "project" triumphs, all he does is to express his relief that it is all over. When Eliza is hurt and leaves the house, Higgins wants her back because he is "used to the sound of her voice and appearance". Using the cold and snobbish character of Higgins, Shaw portrays how women are seen and viewed. In men's eyes, they are nothing but objects to be possessed, used, abused, and manipulated. Higgins does not value Eliza. What is valuable to him is his creation, just like Pygmalion who loved the statue which he carved. Her leaving to find her independence and following her heart to be with the one who appreciates her is Shaw's way of signifying the women's emerging fight for independence.

Overall, this was an interesting play with witty dialogues, satire, and powerful themes. Simple writing and the light storyline made it very much fun to read.

More of my reviews can be found at http://piyangiejay.com/

[EveStar91 · Rating 5 out of 5]

THE FLOWER GIRL. [with feeble defiance] I’ve a right to be here if I like, same as you.

Pygmalion by George Bernard Shaw should have been titled Galatea for how brilliantly feminist the play actually is!

Eliza Doolittle shows a determination to stand up for herself and a shrewd understanding of the way the world works from the very first scene right up to the last. She drives the story forward with her ambition and desire to change the way she is treated. She sees a random gentleman take notes on her accent and expound vaguely on the science of phonetics one rainy day and decides this is what she needs to set up a more respectable flower shop catering to a more polished clientele.

This story wasn't really about Higgins who wants to make a duchess of this draggletailed guttersnipe and Pickering discussing his process with him. It was about Eliza quickly grasping the essence of Higgins' comments, searching for him and offering to pay two-fifths of her daily income for him to coach her pronunciation with the end goal of opening a flower shop - and she does all this in the face of scorn, standing up for her principles every step of the way. It is Mrs. Pearce and Mrs. Higgins who really look out for her welfare and her interests, lecturing some commonsense into Higgins and Pickering whenever required.

George Bernard Shaw's strong character sketches - especially Eliza taking huge steps towards the future she wants, Higgins resisting true change in his ways because he can simply afford to - and his understanding of human nature remain quite relevant at their core in any time period. As in Shaw's afterword, Galatea never does quite like Pygmalion: his relation to her is too godlike to be altogether agreeable, and this Galatea manages to break out of Pygmalion's complete control.

ELIZA. [looking fiercely round at him] I wouldn’t marry YOU if you asked me; and you’re nearer my age than what he is.

🌟🌟🌟🌟3/4🌟
[One star for the premise and the whole play; One star for the character sketches; One star for the plot and themes; 3/4 star for the world-building; One star for the writing - 4 3/4 stars in total.]

[Cynnamon · Rating 5 out of 5]

So far I only knew My Fair Lady , the musical based on Bernard Shaw's Pygmalion.

Now I've also read the original and even in the original language and I'm totally blown away by Shaw's puns and imaginative insults, his character portrayal and his style in general. The play was many times more exhilarating than I expected and to be honest, My Fair Lady is just a faint copy with music (even if I still like it lot). The less sweet ending of the story also suits me very well.

Very recommendable reading, which is worth 5 stars to me.
----------------------------
Bisher kannte ich nur My Fair Lady, das Musical, das auf Bernard Shaws Pygmalion beruht.

Nun habe ich auch das Original gelesen und sogar in der Originalsprache und bin total hingerissen von Shaws Wortwitz und seinen phantasievollen Beleidigungen, seiner Charakterdarstellung und seinem Stil generell. Das Stück war um ein vielfaches erheiternder, als ich erwartet hatte und ehrlich gesagt ist My Fair Lady nur ein Abklatsch mit Musik (auch wenn es mir immer noch gut gefällt). Auch das weniger süßliche Ende der Geschichte kommt mir sehr entgegen.

Eine sehr empfehlenswerte Lektüre, die mir 5 Sterne wert ist.

[Calista · Rating 5 out of 5]

My Fair Lady, which is based on this story, is a delightful musical I have seen many times over the years. I love the music and the story. It seems very one of a kind. I have never read the play by George and finally got around to doing so.

Henry Higgins simply jumps off the page completely realized and his own full character. He is so boorish and a big bully, he's easy to hate and also to see that somehow in that thick skull of his, he did mean well. Eliza is just a realized and we see a very smart woman of the streets move up in class, but has she really. Now she isn't really fit for any world.

There are some scenes from the movie that are not in the book such as the Rain in Spain song, which disappointed me, but the adaptation to movie was pretty faithful. They did change the end to give it a good end and George does not give us a happy ending. They are fighting like cats and dogs when the book ends and part leaving if they ever see each other in question.

George is brilliant and I should have been reading his stuff much sooner. I enjoyed this and will be reading the superman book of his next.

[Luís · Rating 5 out of 5]

Professor Higgins, who finds it “tremendously interesting to take a human being and transform him, by creating a new language, into an absolutely different human being,” took on the challenge of transforming the flower seller Elisa Doolittle in a few months, so cockney, so “deliciously vulgar,” “dung-up stream woodcock,” a natural “insult to [her] mother tongue,” and to pass her off as a duchess at the ambassador’s garden party.
Unlike other readers, I liked the character of Higgins, more adept at Royal Society meetings than the more mundane circumstances of life; his lack of sentimentalism is rather funny, I find, as is his non-conformism, his great passion for phonetics, his contempt for social conventions and distinctions. Doolittle, Elisa’s father, is a fascinating character too, rejecting the dominant morality, preferring passion to respectability, freedom, and fantasy to material wealth, which in his eyes has the effect of taming him, cowering him, to stifle his joy and cheerfulness.
The piece’s tone, full of humor, brilliant, and piquant, allows Shaw to engage in social criticism without heaviness and makes reading very pleasant.

[Carol · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was surprised.......this is not a love story. I only vaguely remember the musical, and the outcome I envisioned is not what happens in the play.

I remember Eliza Dolittle as a poor flower girl, and the bet between two upper class gentlemen to turn a street "guttersnipe" into a proper lady, but not the horribly chauvinistic treatment she receives or the choices she makes in the end.

Totally enjoyed it!

[Fabian · Rating 4 out of 5]

SPOILER!

A fountainhead of inspiration for countless projects, Pygmalion is actually not about love, and, this being a Shaw play, is all about social classes, manners and, what? phonetics. Also about humanity—about the power-play inherent in all types of relationships. Higgins, undeniably a gay man completely up to give the Betty a total overhaul, is not loveable, not even likeable. He's a tyrant—but he is written o-so-well, with British wit to spare. He is the prototypical academic—a sociopath, even. Eliza Doolittle, however, well, her character has made it into the popular consciousness: at once naïve and downtrodden, she is eager to learn, she is motivated to become better than who she is. Her lines drip with syrup—but I like her a lot, too.

Alas, this is something quite unexpected. The plot itself is pretty dull. We get no lessons from Higgins, we only see the transformation complete. The metamorphosis and the theme of taking on human projects has been recycled, as I’ve said, to no end. But the ending is quite extraordinary: instead of the usual romantic finale, the ending we are given stops only on the stage, but Shaw continues an epilogue for his most famous play, telling the reader why Eliza chooses Freddy over (he’s gay!) Higgins. Incredibly realistic, this unromantic end. Shaw is definitely a realist—yet it’s difficult not to find most of his works instantaneously endearing.

[Maede · Rating 4 out of 5]

بخشی از نمایشنامه‌ی پیگمالیون اثر جورج برنارد شاو رو رو اولین بار چند هفته پیش در کتاب هدوی خوندم و باید برای تدریسش سر کلاس زبان آماده می‌شدم. این شد که کمی راجع بهش مطالعه کردم و آخرش تصمیم گرفتم بخونمش و چه انتخاب درستی بود

پیگمالیون یک داستان اسطوره‌ای یونانی از مجسمه‌سازیه که از زنان بیزاره، اما مجسمه‌ای می‌سازه که به قدری زیباست که عاشقش میشه. الهه‌ی عشق آفرودیت در نهایت به مجسمه زندگی می‌بخشه و این دو به هم می‌رسند

پیگمالیونِ برنارد شاو مردیه که استاد آواشناسیه و تصمیم می‌گیره یک دختر فقیر گلفروش با ادبیات کوچه بازاری رو تبدیل به یک زن موقر از طبقه‌ی اشرافی بکنه. اما میشه گفت تشابهات این اثر با اسمش همینجا تموم میشه. این نمایشنامه برخلاف اقتباس‌ معروفش (بانوی زیبای من) رمانتیک نیست و قرار نبوده باشه. شاو در این اثر به ساختارهای اجتماعی حمله می‌کنه و سوال‌های عمیقی مطرح می‌کنه. چه چیزی واقعاً به جز پول طبقات اجتماعی رو از هم جدا می‌کنه؟ آیا بعضی انسان‌ها به ذات برتری‌ای دارند یا لباس‌ها، طرز صحبت کردن و حلقه‌های اجتماعیشون حس این برتری رو القا می‌کنه؟ آیا اخلاقیات با توجه به طبقه‌ی اجتماعی تعریف میشه؟

پیچیدگی کاراکترهای اصلی و مکالمه‌های تند بینشون از نقطه قوت‌های این نمایشنامه‌ست. از طرفی فکر می‌کنم شاو از مردهای پیشروی زمان خودش بوده که به زن‌ها و جایگاهشون در اجتماع جور دیگه‌ای نگاه می‌کرده و برای همین بی‌رحمانه ساختارهای سنتی محدودکننده رو مسخره می‌کنه

کاراکترهای این نمایشنامه ساعت‌ها جای صحبت دارند اما جالب این بود که در آخر کتا�� برنارد شاو موخره‌ای اضافه کرده و ضمن جمع کردن داستان و ناامید کردن آدم‌های رمانتیک، عملاً خودش شخصیت‌هاش رو از لحاظ روانشناسی تحلیل کرده. این بخش می‌تونه بنا به سلیقه‌ی خواننده به زیاده‌گویی و دخالت بی‌جای نویسنده محسوب بشه یا به چشم یک مکالمه‌ی عمیق با نویسنده دیده بشه. من از گروه دومم

من خود نمایشنامه رو خوندم و به اجرای خلاصه شده‌ی بی‌بی‌سی هم گوش دادم که مخصوصاً چون در این نمایشنامه نوع صحبت کردن مهمه و باید بدونید لحجه‌ی کاکنی انگلیسی چطور صحبت میشه، می‌تونه به درک و جالب‌تر شدن نمایش کمک کنه

کتاب رو می‌تونید از اینجا دانلود کنید
Maede's Books

۱۴۰۳/۲/۲۳

[Manny · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you happen to be the Wayans Brothers and are stuck for ideas about where your next racist, sexist, gratuituously offensive comedy is going to come from, have you considered doing a gender- and color-reversed version of Pygmalion? I feel it has real potential. My first thought is to reunite Bernie Mac and Ashton Kutcher from Guess Who. Mac, in drag, plays Henrietta, a black linguist who bets her friend Picky (Oprah) that she can turn preppy white-boy Kutcher into a bro' within six weeks. Here's the warm-up joke, which I was told many years ago at a linguistics conference by a black colleague:

So there's this black dude and this white dude, and they're arguing about what color God is. In the end, they agree that there's only one way to find out. They get down on their knees, and they pray to God to reveal this important piece of information to His unworthy servants. There's a peal of thunder, and then they hear this booming voice from the sky saying:

I AM WHAT I AM

"Well, you was right!" says the black dude. "Cuz if He was black, He'd have said 'Ah IS what Ah IS!'"

[EMMA · Rating 3 out of 5]

چند روز پیش یه کتاب در مورد ADHD
خوندم و همین سبب شد که سرچ کنم چه نویسنده هایی این اختلال داشتند؟ که به اسم اگاتا کریستی و ژول ورن و برنارد شاو رسیدم. از برنارد شاو تا حالا کتابی نخونده بودم واسه همین ترغیب شدم یکی از کارهاشو امتحان کنم.
*********
NLP (Neuro-linguistic programming)
به معنای برنامه‌ریزی عصبی‌کلامی است که درمورد اینکه با تغییر در ضمیر در ناخودآگاهمون بتونیم در زنئگیمون تغییر ایجاد کنیم.
یکی از راهکارهای این علم تغییر در کلمات استفاده شده است چون باور بر این هستش که کلماتی که استفاده میکنیم قدرت تغییر در زندگی ما دارند. این علم حدود نیم قرن هستش پایه گذاری شده.
بانوی زیبای من بیش از یه قرن پیش نوشته شده و داستان براساس این شکل میگیره که یک پروفسور قصد داره واژگانی که یه گلفروش استفاده میکنه رو تغییر بده، البته نه فقط واژگان بلکه تلفظ و گرامر. این واسم خیلی جالب بود که یکی قبل از به وجود اومدن چیزی از ازش استفاده میکرد.
*******************
اسپویل

اما آیای واقعا لیزا صرفا فقط با تغییر در کلمات تغییر کرد؟ یا عوامل دیگه ایی هم دخیل بودند؟
لیزا چرا با فردی ازدواج کرد؟ بخاطر غرور پروفسور که نمیتونست به عشقش اعتراف کنه؟ یا اینکه فردی از لیزا ضعیف تر بود و همین باعث میشد لیزا احساس قدرت بهش دست بده؟
آیا احساس خوبی که به گذشته خودمون داریم با اینکه ممکنه در دریای بدبختی غرق شده باشیم بخاط اینکه چون یاد گرفته بودیم چطور رفتار کنیم و همین احساس امنیت میداد بهمون؟ آیا تغییر باید در زندگی انسانها صورت بگیره حتی اگه احساس کنن دیگه آزادی گذشته رو ندارن و در دنیای جدید سردرگم هستن؟ این احساس تعلق به گذشته ناشی از چیه؟

[Saranya ⋆☕︎ ˖ · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a delightful concoction... much like a perfectly brewed cup of English tea – robust, subtly sweet and with just enough bite to keep you on your toes. I found myself both charmed and slightly exasperated, much like Professor Henry Higgins himself, though hopefully with a touch more self-awareness...

👨‍🏫Professor Higgins, a man who thinks fixing someone’s accent can fix their whole life. He’s brilliant, rude and completely unaware of how annoying he is. You’ll want to throw a dictionary at him—but you’ll also want to hear what he says next:)

🌼Eliza Doolittle, a poor flower girl with a loud voice and even louder opinions. Higgins tries to turn her into a “lady,” but Eliza’s real glow-up isn’t just about fancy words—it’s about finding her own strength. She starts off as a squashed cabbage leaf and ends up as someone who can stand tall, even in front of the man who tried to shape her. She is a Covent Garden flower girl whose unpleasant and impetuous nature, is only outmatched by her atrocious accent.

The real joy was in watching these two verbal gladiators spar. Higgins, with his booming pronouncements and complete disregard for social niceties, is a magnificent monster. I was captivated by his audacious brilliance!

And Eliza! Eliza is the heart of the play. Her transformation (both external and internal) is genuinely moving!! She sheds not just her Cockney "a's" but also her deference... blossoming into a woman who demands respect... even from her intellectual tormentor!!!

In an age where accents still carried weight and social mobility remains a challenge, this one felt as fresh and relevant as ever.

A sweet, sharp and wonderfully witty indictment of societal prejudice!!!
This story made me laugh, wince and cheer for the little flower girl who dared to speak her mind eloquently.
The play was truly delicious

[Adina ( catching up..very slowly) · Rating 4 out of 5]

Probably the favorite play read until now, which I have to admit are not many. A linguist makes a bet that he can turn a flower girl into a lady in 6 months. Both the girls and the linguist are strong characters and from there conflicts arise. By the end of the play they get attached to each other in a strange way. What I found special about the play was the afterword written by the author himself that explains in details how the life of the character will unfold.

[Peiman E iran · Rating 4 out of 5]

‎دوستانِ گرانقدر، این نمایشنامه، موضوعی بسیار جالب دارد و به زبان شناسی و آوا شناسی و البته تأثیرِ آن در شخصیتِ انسانها اشاره دارد.. که چگونه میتوانیم با تغییر و آموزشِ نوعِ بیانِ واژه ها و جملات، به نوعی به اصالت دست یابیم و البته در موردِ زندگیِ اشرافیان و طبقهٔ ثروتمندِ جامعه نیز اشاره هایی در داستان خواهید دید
‎داستان در موردِ دختری زیبا به نامِ <الیزا دولیتل> میباشد.. الیزا دختری گل فروش و دوره گرد است، او در شبی بارانی، به طورِ اتفاقی با پروفسور <هنری هیگینز> و سرهنگ <پیکیرینگ> آشنا میشود.. پروفسور هیگینز، استاد و پژوهشگرِ زبان شناسی و آوا شناسی میباشد.. او با سرمایهٔ پیکیرینگ، هر دو تلاش میکنند تا با شش ماه آموزشِ شبانه روزی، الیزا را که نوعِ سخن گفتنش کوچه بازاری و کولی وار است، تبدیل به دوشیزه ای خوش بیان و اصیل کنند که هرکس او را ببیند، تصور کند که با یک پرنسسِ اشرافی و نژاده، طرف است
‎الیزا استعدادِ زیادی دارد و تمامیِ تمریناتِ هیگینز را با شور ِ فراوان، انجام میدهد
‎در مهمانیِ بزرگی که در سفارتخانه برگزار میشود، و اشراف زاده ها و دوک هایِ اروپایی و انگلیسی در آن حضور دارند، هیگینز و پیکیرینگ از دوشیزه ای که در شش ماه آن را پرورش داده اند، رونمایی میکنند.. و جالب است که هیچکس شک نمیکند که الیزا همان دخترِ گلفروشِ خیابانی است، و به خیالشان، او یک پرنسسِ نژاددارِ اروپایی میباشد
‎الیزا، به مرورِ زمان به هنری هیگینز، دل میبندد، ولی رفتارِ هنری با او بسیار بد است و همچون کنیز با او برخورد میکند.. البته به نظر می آید، پروفسور هیگینز نیز الیزا را دوست دارد، ولی غرورش اجازه نمیدهد تا این علاقه را آشکار نماید
‎جالب است بدانید که "پیگمالیون" نامِ این کتاب، از داستانی یونانی گرفته شده است.. او دلباختهٔ یکی از مجسمه هایی میشود که با دستانِ خویش آن را ساخته است... به نوعی پروفسور هیگینز نیز همچون پیگمالیون، دلباختهٔ ساختهٔ خویش میشود و دل به دختری میبندد که آن را در شش ماه تغییر داده و پرورش داده است
‎عزیزانم، بهتر است خودتان این داستان را خوانده و از سرانجامِ داستانِ الیزا و پروفسور هیگینز، آگاه شوید
----------------------------------------------
‎الیزا به هیگینز: من گل میفروختم، ولی خودم را نمیفروختم... حالا تو از من بانویی ساختی که دیگر هیچ چیزی نمیتوانم بفروشم... ای کاش، همانجایی که مرا پیدا کردی، رهایم میکردی
******************************
‎تفاوت میانِ یک بانو و یک دخترِ گلفروش، نوعِ رفتار کردنش با دیگران نیست، بلکه تفاوت در این است که دیگران چطور با او رفتار کنند
******************************
‎اگر نمی توانی قدرِ چیزی که داری را بدانی، بهتر است چیزی به دست آوری که بتوانی قدرِ آن را بدانی
******************************
‎زنانِ زیادی هستند که شوهرانشان را مست میکنند تا بتوانند آنها را تحمل کنند
******************************
‎آن انسانی خوشبخت است که می تواند با سرگرمیِ خویش، هزینهٔ زندگی اش را دربیاورد
---------------------------------------------
‎امیدوارم این ریویو در جهتِ آشنایی با این کتاب، کافی و مفید بوده باشه
‎<پیروز باشید و ایرانی>

[Dave Schaafsma · Rating 5 out of 5]

So, I’ll embark on a Shaw project, rereading most of his plays this year, I decided. This first, Pygmalion, is the one with which I am most familiar, having taught it and seen it--on the stage and as My Fair Lady--and I was the Technical Director of a high school production when I was a high school teacher. I really loved listening to an audio production yesterday, stopping to listen to parts of it I admired. It’s clever, funny, and provocative.

I was tempted to write a review such as Paul Bryant’s review of Oliver Twist to the effect that it sucks because there are no songs in it, but that would be tempting fate, since Paul’s review is one of the best and most popular on Goodreads. But I do like the much-lauded film version, though I think it works against Shaw’s afterword of the play where he makes it clear that Eliza and Professor Higgins would not have been a great romantic match, however much we can tell it is a romantic set-up--that sub-genre of enemies-become-lovers-- and are teased to hope they will get together in the end. Broadway demanded more romantic hopefulness than the play indicates, and Hollywood demanded it as My Fair Lady. But ‘enry is a confirmed bachelor, and a brute. And the Eliza is strong. Is Higgins a misogynist? His defense is this:

“The great secret, Eliza, is not having bad manners or good manners or any other particular sort of manners, but having the same manner for all human souls: in short, behaving as if were in Heaven, where there are no third-class carriages, and one soul is as good as another.”

So Higgins treated everyone the same: Badly.

And as to women in particular:

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?

The play is of course about a man who discovers a flower girl, and somewhat riffing off the Pygmalion myth, commits to helping her pass as a “lady” of high society. One of Shaw’s interests is language, and the politics of language, so Higgins and Pickering, as socio-linguists get to be mouthpieces for the playwright.

And then there are so so many great lines and characters, perhaps best being Liza’s father:

Higgins: Have you no morals, man?
Doolittle [unabashed]: Can’t afford them, Governor. Neither could you if you was as poor as me.

You could do worse with a few hours than reading the original, with Shaw’s notes on the strong and independent woman that is Eliza, and then seeing My Fair Lady to analyze the differences.

[Jamie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Eh. This was ... fine. Most of the interesting stuff took place between scenes and the reader only gets to witness the aftermath. I thought for sure that Eliza was going to end up marrying the insufferable Henry Higgins, so I was happy to find out that I was wrong.

[Dee · Rating 4 out of 5]

What an pleasure to read! No wonder this is and always will be so popular.
The characters are facinating and really bring this story to life. The language style and the way the classes are portrayed have this brilliant comedy element.
This must be an absolute gem to see on stage!

[Jonathan Terrington · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the last book I will finish in 2012 as there are only 6 hours remaining in my day. It is certainly a fitting book (or rather play inside a book) to end the year on. For Pygmalion is a story about new beginnings and about transformation. What better book to symbolise the changing of the year, I say!

The classic musical My Fair Lady is perhaps my favourite musical film that I have seen. The acting is superb, the plotting excellent and all the music serves to add to the humorous feel of the film. If you've seen My Fair Lady the plot of Pygmalion will not be too unfamiliar to you. It is the tale of one professor of phonetics by the name of Henry Higgins who makes a bet that he can transform a girl from the street, Eliza Doolittle, into a woman of breeding - a lady - simply by changing her vocabulary and language. Of course if you have seen the musical I must add that the ending in Pygmalion is different, in a way that suits the differences apparent in the play.

The author of this play, George Bernard Shaw, is an interesting character. A man credited with wanting to use the intricacies of the English language to spell 'fish' as 'ghoti'. Which makes indefinitely more sense, who wouldn't want to catch a ghoti? I say 'credited' because various references indicate he likely did not come up with the idea in the first place. Bernard Shaw also won an oscar for the screenplay for My Fair Lady, which makes the differences between the two very interesting to observe. However it is clear as to why Bernard Shaw, with his obsession with language, chose to write a play with a phonetician as its protagonist, something not often done in literature.

The two notable themes I observed in this play are the presence and power of language as it connects to everyday life and also the idea of responsibility for that which we create. This second idea is apparent in connection particularly to the various mythological and literary references visible in Pygmalion.

Language

Language, I have always believed, is power. It is the power to shape the world and change lives. If you've seen the incredible Dead Poets Society you may remember (apart from 'carpe diem') the line about how language was made to 'woo women'. I believe language is far more than about romance or emotion however, though the idea in that line when expanded holds true: that language can influence people. Why else do we have the Biblical creation story where 'And God said "let there be light", and there was light.' (Genesis 1:3)? Why else do we have countless fairytales and fantasy stories where magic is produced through speaking language? Why do we find that the great leaders of all time were also great writers, thinkers and orators? Think of Winston Churchill or Adolf Hitler, a man who manipulated people with words! It is because words, language, has power. Power to affect our thinking processes, those parts of us connected to language and which control us. Language is what truly separates us from animals in many ways.

In Pygmalion language is shown in its transformative ability. The language of Liza Doolittle to begin with is atrocious and as such she belongs to the streets, selling flowers. Later she becomes a lady, largely thanks to the change of her vocabulary. It must also be noted, particularly in the garden party scene, how language among the upper classes is a thing of both culture and triviality. When Liza for a moment slips back into her street language the upper class gentry she is among think she is speaking with a new form of popular slang and though taken aback by her cursing something as 'bloody' consider this language progressive. Another instance of transformation is shown in Liza's father who has an eloquence with his tongue in regards to politics to begin with but later becomes a gentlemen because of this language ability.

Literary References

Pygmalion is full of references to literature. In particular John Milton's brilliant Paradise Lost (a must read for all literature lovers by the way), Frankenstein and the myth of Pygmalion and Galatea. According to this myth Pygmalion was a sculptor who created the most beautiful and lifelike sculpture of a woman, having vowed he never would marry. He did however fall in love with this sculpture thanks to Venus (or Aphrodite depending on the version I suppose), who then conveniently transformed the statue into a real woman for Pygmalion to marry. Each of these stories have the main theme of the responsibility of the creator to the created. Paradise Lost observes the relationship between God and his creations in Satan, Adam and Eve; Frankenstein observes the relationship between Victor Frankenstein and his creature; and the mythology of Pygmalion hints at the idea that it was Pygmalion's duty to look after Galatea (the statue) as a wife.

George Bernard Shaw's play Pygmalion could be seen as a subtle subversion of the Pygmalion myth in how in the end Liza rejects her 'creator' though he has clearly fallen in love with her. It further suggests that there is a moral obligation for a creator to care for the thing he has created, in Henry Higgins' case he had a duty to Liza and one which in the play he fails at.

Conclusion

Pygmalion is a deep literary play which has fascinating themes about language and moral obligation. It is also a social critique (as the best plays, poems and novels are) challenging the way we live our lives. Though it is humorous and witty the most powerful aspect of this play is in how it reflects on our true reality, leading the audience to ultimately question 'who in the end is at fault?'

[Maria Olga Lectoraapasionada · Rating 5 out of 5]

Muy amena y divertida lectura, el lenguaje que utiliza Elisa la florista es de lo más auténtico y gracioso y me encantó.

Eliza es orgullosa y altanera, pero a la vez es adorable, es imposible no empatizar con ella, imposible no quererla, es encantadora.

Vaya personajes más singulares y pintorescos todos, pero me quedo con estos dos Higgins (El de la notas ) y Elisa ( La florista), que son los grandes protagonistas de esa obra de teatro.

Después de una noche de malos entendidos, Elisa se presenta en la casa de el de las notas para que la enseñe hablar y utilizar el vocabulario correctamente.

Una fantasía de divertidas y surrealistas anécdotas y situaciones van pasando a lo largo de toda la narración, en la cual no he parado de asombrarme y de reírme, os llevara menos de dos horas leerla y os aseguro que aburriros desde luego que no os vais a aburrir.

Nada sobra y nada falta, relatada perfectamente, con un vocabulario a la antigua usanza.

No olvidar que esta obra de teatro se escribió en 1912.

Posdata: Pero nunca olvidéis que la historia que cuenta un libro no siempre es igual.


Extractos del libro:

¡Dichoso el que tiene una profesión que coincide con su afición!

En todo lo que se hace verdaderamente bien, hay algo de profesional.

Hay pocos que saben ser lo que son.