What do you think?
Rate this book
Pygmalion & Major Barbara
George Bernard Shaw was the greatest British dramatist after Shakespeare, a satirist equal to Jonathan Swift, and a playwright whose most profound gift was his ability to make audiences think by provoking them to laughter.
In one of his best-loved plays, Pygmalion, which later became the basis for the musical My Fair Lady, Shaw compels the audience to see the utter absurdity and hypocrisy of class distinction when Professor Henry Higgins wagers that he can transform a common flower girl into a lady—and then pass her off as a duchess—simply by changing her speech and manners.
In Major Barbara Shaw spins out the drama of an eccentric millionaire, a romantic poet, and a misguided savior of souls, Major Barbara herself, in a topsy-turvy masterpiece of sophisticated banter and urbane humor. His brilliant dialogue, combined with his use of paradox and socialist theory, never fails to tickle, entertain—and challenge.
In one of his best-loved plays, Pygmalion, which later became the basis for the musical My Fair Lady, Shaw compels the audience to see the utter absurdity and hypocrisy of class distinction when Professor Henry Higgins wagers that he can transform a common flower girl into a lady—and then pass her off as a duchess—simply by changing her speech and manners.
In Major Barbara Shaw spins out the drama of an eccentric millionaire, a romantic poet, and a misguided savior of souls, Major Barbara herself, in a topsy-turvy masterpiece of sophisticated banter and urbane humor. His brilliant dialogue, combined with his use of paradox and socialist theory, never fails to tickle, entertain—and challenge.
336 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1916
15 people are currently reading
167 people want to read
About the author
George Bernard Shaw
1,968 books4,116 followersGeorge Bernard Shaw was an Irish playwright, socialist, and a co-founder of the London School of Economics. Although his first profitable writing was music and literary criticism, in which capacity he wrote many highly articulate pieces of journalism, his main talent was for drama. Over the course of his life he wrote more than 60 plays. Nearly all his plays address prevailing social problems, but each also includes a vein of comedy that makes their stark themes more palatable. In these works Shaw examined education, marriage, religion, government, health care, and class privilege.
An ardent socialist, Shaw was angered by what he perceived to be the exploitation of the working class. He wrote many brochures and speeches for the Fabian Society. He became an accomplished orator in the furtherance of its causes, which included gaining equal rights for men and women, alleviating abuses of the working class, rescinding private ownership of productive land, and promoting healthy lifestyles. For a short time he was active in local politics, serving on the London County Council.
In 1898, Shaw married Charlotte Payne-Townshend, a fellow Fabian, whom he survived. They settled in Ayot St. Lawrence in a house now called Shaw's Corner.
He is the only person to have been awarded both a Nobel Prize for Literature (1925) and an Oscar (1938). The former for his contributions to literature and the latter for his work on the film "Pygmalion" (adaptation of his play of the same name). Shaw wanted to refuse his Nobel Prize outright, as he had no desire for public honours, but he accepted it at his wife's behest. She considered it a tribute to Ireland. He did reject the monetary award, requesting it be used to finance translation of Swedish books to English.
Shaw died at Shaw's Corner, aged 94, from chronic health problems exacerbated by injuries incurred by falling.
An ardent socialist, Shaw was angered by what he perceived to be the exploitation of the working class. He wrote many brochures and speeches for the Fabian Society. He became an accomplished orator in the furtherance of its causes, which included gaining equal rights for men and women, alleviating abuses of the working class, rescinding private ownership of productive land, and promoting healthy lifestyles. For a short time he was active in local politics, serving on the London County Council.
In 1898, Shaw married Charlotte Payne-Townshend, a fellow Fabian, whom he survived. They settled in Ayot St. Lawrence in a house now called Shaw's Corner.
He is the only person to have been awarded both a Nobel Prize for Literature (1925) and an Oscar (1938). The former for his contributions to literature and the latter for his work on the film "Pygmalion" (adaptation of his play of the same name). Shaw wanted to refuse his Nobel Prize outright, as he had no desire for public honours, but he accepted it at his wife's behest. She considered it a tribute to Ireland. He did reject the monetary award, requesting it be used to finance translation of Swedish books to English.
Shaw died at Shaw's Corner, aged 94, from chronic health problems exacerbated by injuries incurred by falling.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
September 29, 2025
Pygmalion, written by George Bernard Shaw, based on his play, inspired by the ancient Greek myth
9.4 out of 10
Pygmalion is based on the ancient Greek myth, about the sculptor named Pygmalion who creates a statue that is so beautiful that he falls in love with it and then asks the gods to give it life and they do, therefore Galatea becomes a human being.
In psychology, The Pygmalion Effect has been studied in schools, where it was discovered that teachers who believed in the capacities, skills, potential of their students had better results, in that those pupils who benefited from this trust went on to obtain excellent results.
It works in other areas too, when students believe in their professors, these became better, and this can be applied by management, for when business leaders have confidence in those who are under their command, the benefits are visible and quantifiable, as well as the reverse.
The opening scenes take place when rain is forcing people to take refuge, an occasion for the flower girl Eliza Doolittle aka the Oscar nominated Wendy Hiller to try to sell some to the upper class people that are waiting for a taxi, which Freddy Eynsford Hill had gone to fetch, while his mother and sister are waiting.
Professor Henry Higgins, portrayed by Academy Award Nominee Leslie Howard – known for his role in Gone with the Wind - http://realini.blogspot.com/2018/05/g... - is a phonetics expert who is trying to listen to conversations and find interesting accents and speech patterns.
He is able to place anyone he listens to within a very short distance in the country and in London, that precision is increased to an astonishing level, for he seems to be the ultimate, quintessential authority on speech, interested to look for and find Colonel George Pickering, another specialist, who happens to be in the same spot.
The colonel has travelled all the way from India to meet the professor, who in turn had been planning to sail to India to find the colonel and now they are about to embark on an interesting ‘experiment’, with the colonel showing a humane, kind, sensitive, polite, decent personality, while Higgins is so abject at times that he would be rejected at the present, a film like this would not be made.
While Colonel Pickering is staying with the professor, invited to avoid the hotel and be his guest, a visitor arrives and it turns out to be Eliza Doolittle, who is interested to get some lessons, for she had heard the other night that this is a language expert and she thinks that she would be able to get a flower shop if she furthers her education and she is willing to pay.
The money she has working on the street are a pittance for the much better off phonetics expert, but he is wise to calculate what the offer means, related to her standard of living and this is a fortune she offers, as an important amount of her total, rather small income, which she is ready to offer to get further and have a career, although she would soon be made to suffer, forced to take her clothes (in the privacy of the bathroom, not in public) off and have the bath which she resents most in the world…or so it looks like.
What is annoying and unacceptable for the modern viewer – who has nevertheless to look at things in perspective, considering the ancient myth and the époque when George Bernard Shaw has written the script for the film – is the sexist, misogynistic, abusive attitude of the professor, who keeps insulting the poor girl, insisting that he ‘treats a duchess as a poor woman and vice versa’.
The colonel and the professor make a bet, with the latter claiming that he would be able to pass the uneducated flower girl, with her awful accent, abominable grammar and lack of any knowledge of etiquette, rules of engagement, manners in society for a duchess, once he is finished with phonetics, posture, correct English, which should take him a few months and then they would attend an important gathering and see the extraordinary results.
First of all, this is a comedy and the confrontation between Pygmalion and Galatea is supposed to be – and it often is – amusing, although in this modern age it could well be embarrassing and deemed unacceptable, and we need to highlight the fact that Eliza could be seen as the Ultimate Winner, not just in terms of education gained, knowledge of proper English and good behavior, but she may be the one who teaches a more important lesson.
Notwithstanding his expertise on language, Professor Higgins is worse than ignorant in what love means, and ultimately, life itself, for he limits himself to super pronunciation and locating cockney accents, but he treats women – granted other humans too – with contempt, he suggests after they win their competition that Eliza marries the colonel, or somebody else and he is rather despicable, especially for one who is supposed to be the Hero.
Finally, the undersigned must say that George Bernard Shaw was such a peculiar man that the perception of his works is affected by his politics – supportive of the communists and the Soviets, which is anathema for someone who has had to live in a regime installed by these vicious people – and his rather outré persona, often amusing, but rather arrogant and pretentious – even when the Oscar was awarded for the script of this film, the writer said something to the effect that this like giving a prize to George for being the King of Britain.
Pygmalion has been included on The New York Times’ Best 1,000 Movies Ever Made list, available here:
https://www.listchallenges.com/new-yo...
9.4 out of 10
Pygmalion is based on the ancient Greek myth, about the sculptor named Pygmalion who creates a statue that is so beautiful that he falls in love with it and then asks the gods to give it life and they do, therefore Galatea becomes a human being.
In psychology, The Pygmalion Effect has been studied in schools, where it was discovered that teachers who believed in the capacities, skills, potential of their students had better results, in that those pupils who benefited from this trust went on to obtain excellent results.
It works in other areas too, when students believe in their professors, these became better, and this can be applied by management, for when business leaders have confidence in those who are under their command, the benefits are visible and quantifiable, as well as the reverse.
The opening scenes take place when rain is forcing people to take refuge, an occasion for the flower girl Eliza Doolittle aka the Oscar nominated Wendy Hiller to try to sell some to the upper class people that are waiting for a taxi, which Freddy Eynsford Hill had gone to fetch, while his mother and sister are waiting.
Professor Henry Higgins, portrayed by Academy Award Nominee Leslie Howard – known for his role in Gone with the Wind - http://realini.blogspot.com/2018/05/g... - is a phonetics expert who is trying to listen to conversations and find interesting accents and speech patterns.
He is able to place anyone he listens to within a very short distance in the country and in London, that precision is increased to an astonishing level, for he seems to be the ultimate, quintessential authority on speech, interested to look for and find Colonel George Pickering, another specialist, who happens to be in the same spot.
The colonel has travelled all the way from India to meet the professor, who in turn had been planning to sail to India to find the colonel and now they are about to embark on an interesting ‘experiment’, with the colonel showing a humane, kind, sensitive, polite, decent personality, while Higgins is so abject at times that he would be rejected at the present, a film like this would not be made.
While Colonel Pickering is staying with the professor, invited to avoid the hotel and be his guest, a visitor arrives and it turns out to be Eliza Doolittle, who is interested to get some lessons, for she had heard the other night that this is a language expert and she thinks that she would be able to get a flower shop if she furthers her education and she is willing to pay.
The money she has working on the street are a pittance for the much better off phonetics expert, but he is wise to calculate what the offer means, related to her standard of living and this is a fortune she offers, as an important amount of her total, rather small income, which she is ready to offer to get further and have a career, although she would soon be made to suffer, forced to take her clothes (in the privacy of the bathroom, not in public) off and have the bath which she resents most in the world…or so it looks like.
What is annoying and unacceptable for the modern viewer – who has nevertheless to look at things in perspective, considering the ancient myth and the époque when George Bernard Shaw has written the script for the film – is the sexist, misogynistic, abusive attitude of the professor, who keeps insulting the poor girl, insisting that he ‘treats a duchess as a poor woman and vice versa’.
The colonel and the professor make a bet, with the latter claiming that he would be able to pass the uneducated flower girl, with her awful accent, abominable grammar and lack of any knowledge of etiquette, rules of engagement, manners in society for a duchess, once he is finished with phonetics, posture, correct English, which should take him a few months and then they would attend an important gathering and see the extraordinary results.
First of all, this is a comedy and the confrontation between Pygmalion and Galatea is supposed to be – and it often is – amusing, although in this modern age it could well be embarrassing and deemed unacceptable, and we need to highlight the fact that Eliza could be seen as the Ultimate Winner, not just in terms of education gained, knowledge of proper English and good behavior, but she may be the one who teaches a more important lesson.
Notwithstanding his expertise on language, Professor Higgins is worse than ignorant in what love means, and ultimately, life itself, for he limits himself to super pronunciation and locating cockney accents, but he treats women – granted other humans too – with contempt, he suggests after they win their competition that Eliza marries the colonel, or somebody else and he is rather despicable, especially for one who is supposed to be the Hero.
Finally, the undersigned must say that George Bernard Shaw was such a peculiar man that the perception of his works is affected by his politics – supportive of the communists and the Soviets, which is anathema for someone who has had to live in a regime installed by these vicious people – and his rather outré persona, often amusing, but rather arrogant and pretentious – even when the Oscar was awarded for the script of this film, the writer said something to the effect that this like giving a prize to George for being the King of Britain.
Pygmalion has been included on The New York Times’ Best 1,000 Movies Ever Made list, available here:
https://www.listchallenges.com/new-yo...
November 23, 2017
i read this for my drama course and i'm really happy that i did it. although i solely read major barbara, i can confess that i liked it the best from all the plays i've read for this course.
before reading this piece i got acquainted with Shaw's belief and values and thus i skipped the intro.
this was a play about a family who's father was the head of a huge arms factory and the members of his family referred to him as old demon :)))
the thing about this play was that Shaw was representing a type of pioneer who is trying to change the society for good by doing sth bad.
the characters were lively and interesting, some like Andrew Undershaft more than others :D, and their linguistic patterns differed which led to the beauty of the play. i haven't read Pygmalion but seen the movie and i saw the same characteristics in that movie too. compared to his contemporaries, Shaw has this humor that makes him stand out.
what i liked about this play was the portrayal of the supposed villain. in the 3rd act he mostly talks and for the life of me, i can't disagree with the man. yeah he's harsh a lil about killing, but can't say it wouldn't make the world a better place.
maybe i need to visit a psychiatrist. :))
before reading this piece i got acquainted with Shaw's belief and values and thus i skipped the intro.
this was a play about a family who's father was the head of a huge arms factory and the members of his family referred to him as old demon :)))
the thing about this play was that Shaw was representing a type of pioneer who is trying to change the society for good by doing sth bad.
the characters were lively and interesting, some like Andrew Undershaft more than others :D, and their linguistic patterns differed which led to the beauty of the play. i haven't read Pygmalion but seen the movie and i saw the same characteristics in that movie too. compared to his contemporaries, Shaw has this humor that makes him stand out.
what i liked about this play was the portrayal of the supposed villain. in the 3rd act he mostly talks and for the life of me, i can't disagree with the man. yeah he's harsh a lil about killing, but can't say it wouldn't make the world a better place.
maybe i need to visit a psychiatrist. :))
November 1, 2014
Skip the introduction, which is little more than pages of tired old academic drivel about Shaw's "importance" to English literature (with no defense of the assertion, typical of such introductions) and a bit of Freudian commentary on Shaw's childhood.
Don't skip Shaw's own "First Aid to Critics" introduction to Major Barbara, which arms you well with his perspective and helps you pick up on subtleties. You can read it after reading the play - it IS longer than the play itself - but you'll enjoy it.
And of course, who wouldn't enjoy Pygmalion (the basis for the film My Fair Lady)? It's highly comedic and personal, yet inescapably sociological in premise. Nobody experiencing this play feels preached at, yet we come away instructed, minds equipped in a new way. Genius.
Don't skip Shaw's own "First Aid to Critics" introduction to Major Barbara, which arms you well with his perspective and helps you pick up on subtleties. You can read it after reading the play - it IS longer than the play itself - but you'll enjoy it.
And of course, who wouldn't enjoy Pygmalion (the basis for the film My Fair Lady)? It's highly comedic and personal, yet inescapably sociological in premise. Nobody experiencing this play feels preached at, yet we come away instructed, minds equipped in a new way. Genius.
May 19, 2019
I enjoyed both of these plays. I love the musical My Fair Lady and was interested in reading the play it was derived from. Shaw is definitely cynical in his writing but it was still enjoyable. Both of these plays were, though I knew nothing about Major Barbara going into it. Actually, I only knew of Salvation Army religious practices from Guys and Dolls! I would like to see Pygmalion on stage as I know hearing the dialects live would add much more than to what I imagine the dialects sound like in my head. I appreciated that even though Shaw didn’t end the play with what happened to them all, he did explain what happened to them in the postscript.
November 29, 2021
Quick wit. Reminded me of Oscar Wilde. I'd heard that Pygmalion is what the movie/musical "My Fair Lady" so, I watched that first. I thought that it followed the story fairly well and it made reading this much easier. It has some modern ideas about class, gender, friendship, & romance which were interesting. This must be why it is a classic.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 5, 2016
Pygmalion -
This is the original play that the very famous and popular "My fair Lady" is based on, except that was more of a sweet version, and this retains the original English, perhaps British or even Irish, taste - not sweet, not sour, not bitter or hot, but a little salt and some of that sixth taste that is called "kasaila" or "kashaaya" which means tea in the old sense of medicine.
Here at the end there is a very well written epilogue that explains why the professor does not propose to any woman or have any romantic affair with any woman (and certainly with no man either) - not as a sickness on his part, but as a matter of evolution, and he is very evolved indeed.
Unlike US of today the social norms of Britain then were quite different and sex was not a compulsory activity to prove one was normal, and for that matter normal was never defined as average, either.
So eccentricity was not only allowed it positively thrived and flourished, and benefitted the society enormously. Men like the professor could devote their time and energy to their prefered pusuits. He does end up baffled and quite unable to escape Elizabeth Dolittle though.
Friday, July 9, 2010.
..........................................................................
..........................................................................
Major Barbara -
A delightful look at various prevalent notions and hypocrisies of the times - and realities as they are. Salvation Army, church, politics as a career, ethics of business; niceties of law that might make one illegitimate in UK or at least in England but not in Australia, much less anywhere else in the world; and inheritance vs competence, when it is about running a business.
US, particularly NRA of US (as in gun lobby) seem to have adopted the creed of one of the characters in this to an extent that poor Mr. Shaw could never have imagined - "seem to" being the key here. But on the other hand, who knows, he would perhaps have said that neither NRA of US nor he were wrong, and that any society that allows such happenings without curbing them with laws that made sense and protected children perhaps deserved the grief they allowed the arms manufacturers and dealers to let loose on them. And really US has much that is legal in US but illegal in Europe in many countries, or at least those that matter. Germany for example has outlawed any organisations or pictures to do with their past horror - but not US where those proliferate; so guns too, and the consequent stupidity of innocent persons and your own children massacred in their own homes and schools.
Gun lobby of US - and much else of the world - might claim they follow this very intelligent writer for ethics, but if you look at it with a scrutiny, actually, no they don't; they are doing precisely what the writer cautions against, that is, mixing politics and business - for example in deciding who they will or will not sell to (or allow to carry arms), whether on personal level in the country (men get license easily, women don't, even though they are far more in need of self defence, whether from personal attackers or home robbers and so on), or on global level about nations and gangs (here there is no need of examples - they are far too obvious, well known), therefore making it a mess - or at least helping politics do so.
That said, this is of course an extremely intelligent play as almost everything written by this writer is; this one deals with an arms dealer and the possible social embarrassment his family with aristocratic connections must go through - his son requires that the father help him without allowing it to be known, since he needs to have a social status - and various issues around the question, morality vs. arms manufacturer.
Saturday, July 10, 2010.
..........................................................................
..........................................................................
Sunday, February 23, 2014.
..........................................................................
..........................................................................
This is the original play that the very famous and popular "My fair Lady" is based on, except that was more of a sweet version, and this retains the original English, perhaps British or even Irish, taste - not sweet, not sour, not bitter or hot, but a little salt and some of that sixth taste that is called "kasaila" or "kashaaya" which means tea in the old sense of medicine.
Here at the end there is a very well written epilogue that explains why the professor does not propose to any woman or have any romantic affair with any woman (and certainly with no man either) - not as a sickness on his part, but as a matter of evolution, and he is very evolved indeed.
Unlike US of today the social norms of Britain then were quite different and sex was not a compulsory activity to prove one was normal, and for that matter normal was never defined as average, either.
So eccentricity was not only allowed it positively thrived and flourished, and benefitted the society enormously. Men like the professor could devote their time and energy to their prefered pusuits. He does end up baffled and quite unable to escape Elizabeth Dolittle though.
Friday, July 9, 2010.
..........................................................................
..........................................................................
Major Barbara -
A delightful look at various prevalent notions and hypocrisies of the times - and realities as they are. Salvation Army, church, politics as a career, ethics of business; niceties of law that might make one illegitimate in UK or at least in England but not in Australia, much less anywhere else in the world; and inheritance vs competence, when it is about running a business.
US, particularly NRA of US (as in gun lobby) seem to have adopted the creed of one of the characters in this to an extent that poor Mr. Shaw could never have imagined - "seem to" being the key here. But on the other hand, who knows, he would perhaps have said that neither NRA of US nor he were wrong, and that any society that allows such happenings without curbing them with laws that made sense and protected children perhaps deserved the grief they allowed the arms manufacturers and dealers to let loose on them. And really US has much that is legal in US but illegal in Europe in many countries, or at least those that matter. Germany for example has outlawed any organisations or pictures to do with their past horror - but not US where those proliferate; so guns too, and the consequent stupidity of innocent persons and your own children massacred in their own homes and schools.
Gun lobby of US - and much else of the world - might claim they follow this very intelligent writer for ethics, but if you look at it with a scrutiny, actually, no they don't; they are doing precisely what the writer cautions against, that is, mixing politics and business - for example in deciding who they will or will not sell to (or allow to carry arms), whether on personal level in the country (men get license easily, women don't, even though they are far more in need of self defence, whether from personal attackers or home robbers and so on), or on global level about nations and gangs (here there is no need of examples - they are far too obvious, well known), therefore making it a mess - or at least helping politics do so.
That said, this is of course an extremely intelligent play as almost everything written by this writer is; this one deals with an arms dealer and the possible social embarrassment his family with aristocratic connections must go through - his son requires that the father help him without allowing it to be known, since he needs to have a social status - and various issues around the question, morality vs. arms manufacturer.
Saturday, July 10, 2010.
..........................................................................
..........................................................................
Sunday, February 23, 2014.
..........................................................................
..........................................................................
November 8, 2022
I had read about Pygmalion and that was my favorite greek myth.
A ruler - who happens to be a great sculptor - dislikes women and anything about womanhood, on account of always finding faults in their shape and character.
So he decides to make a lady statue, and make it so that it would be flawless and be able to demonstrate itself as how a woman should look rather than how he imagines they do. But when the statue is completed, it is so perfect and beautiful that Pygmalion falls in love with it, and naturally wants it to love him back. So he askes the goddess to vitalize it and give it life. The goddess accepts and the statue turns into a beautiful woman named Galatea, and long story short, they get married and live happily ever after...
That's why I wanted to read Shaw's interpretation of Pygmalion, and I knew that a movie called My Fair Lady was based on Shaw's play but since I can't stand musicals, I decided to read this book only to read Pygmalion. But what do you know? It was Major Barbara that took the cake. The characters were very interesting - although I don't like this word to describe a piece of art like this but I can't think of anything else right now - and powerful. Specially Mr. Undershaft with his eccentric philosophy and wordplay and quick grip. And what a page-turner! I read it in one sitting even though English is not my main language or even second language and I usually have problems reading English classic literature.
Also I didn't know what to make of the endings either, especially Major Barbara's, but after some thought I concluded that me and Mr. Shaw have different views and ideals when it comes to religion and society. But nevertheless I enjoyed it and I'm glad to have read this enchanting play.
A ruler - who happens to be a great sculptor - dislikes women and anything about womanhood, on account of always finding faults in their shape and character.
So he decides to make a lady statue, and make it so that it would be flawless and be able to demonstrate itself as how a woman should look rather than how he imagines they do. But when the statue is completed, it is so perfect and beautiful that Pygmalion falls in love with it, and naturally wants it to love him back. So he askes the goddess to vitalize it and give it life. The goddess accepts and the statue turns into a beautiful woman named Galatea, and long story short, they get married and live happily ever after...
That's why I wanted to read Shaw's interpretation of Pygmalion, and I knew that a movie called My Fair Lady was based on Shaw's play but since I can't stand musicals, I decided to read this book only to read Pygmalion. But what do you know? It was Major Barbara that took the cake. The characters were very interesting - although I don't like this word to describe a piece of art like this but I can't think of anything else right now - and powerful. Specially Mr. Undershaft with his eccentric philosophy and wordplay and quick grip. And what a page-turner! I read it in one sitting even though English is not my main language or even second language and I usually have problems reading English classic literature.
Also I didn't know what to make of the endings either, especially Major Barbara's, but after some thought I concluded that me and Mr. Shaw have different views and ideals when it comes to religion and society. But nevertheless I enjoyed it and I'm glad to have read this enchanting play.
November 21, 2014
This is the first time I read Shaw and I was surprised. Not exactly pleasantly surprised but the fact that these two plays of his are about socioeconomics was unexpected yet refreshing. Also, there are no silly, impossibly romantic conclusions. On the contrary, as Shaw himself sets out to explain at the end of Pygmalion.
This is a tendency of his: explaining himself, as he does not only at the end of Pygmalion (where he doesn't exactly finish the play but goes on to write a sort of essay about what happened to Eliza and Higgins afterwards) but also in a heavy diatribe against the social organization of the world in a long preface to Major Barbara. I found this very strange and unflattering about him, because, really, if you can't say it in your play, why say it at all?
Shaw was an acerbic critic of his critics and wasted a lot of ink on the subject. Case in point: "[I am driven] to help my critics out with Major Barbara by telling them what to say about it". (Sheesh).
I will say this about him: he's no hypocrite when it comes to money (though his view that poverty is the root of all evil and money a panacea is alarming).
He has very modern ideas about the real power behind everything: the plutocracies of the world. If that was true for him in 1906, imagine how things must look like now.
This is a tendency of his: explaining himself, as he does not only at the end of Pygmalion (where he doesn't exactly finish the play but goes on to write a sort of essay about what happened to Eliza and Higgins afterwards) but also in a heavy diatribe against the social organization of the world in a long preface to Major Barbara. I found this very strange and unflattering about him, because, really, if you can't say it in your play, why say it at all?
Shaw was an acerbic critic of his critics and wasted a lot of ink on the subject. Case in point: "[I am driven] to help my critics out with Major Barbara by telling them what to say about it". (Sheesh).
I will say this about him: he's no hypocrite when it comes to money (though his view that poverty is the root of all evil and money a panacea is alarming).
He has very modern ideas about the real power behind everything: the plutocracies of the world. If that was true for him in 1906, imagine how things must look like now.
December 7, 2010
I have always loved musicals, but I have yet to watch the entirety of My Fair Lady. There is something so off-putting with the way that the story starts, that I can just never get past it.
And yet, I never really had that problem with reading the novel! Instead, I would lose interst as soon as the main character started talking more 'normal'. All of a sudden she wasn't as interesting anymore.
What I like most about this is how classic (almost cliché) the whole idea of a low-class girl created into a high-class one via the powers of language and speech has become. This is obviously a classic, and just needs to be read by everyone.
I didn't find it boring, just a little lacking in character as it wore down. (These days, when encountering heroines like this, I always pray that they'll keep their lower class speech! Like in Marillon the Magician!)
And yet, I never really had that problem with reading the novel! Instead, I would lose interst as soon as the main character started talking more 'normal'. All of a sudden she wasn't as interesting anymore.
What I like most about this is how classic (almost cliché) the whole idea of a low-class girl created into a high-class one via the powers of language and speech has become. This is obviously a classic, and just needs to be read by everyone.
I didn't find it boring, just a little lacking in character as it wore down. (These days, when encountering heroines like this, I always pray that they'll keep their lower class speech! Like in Marillon the Magician!)
October 12, 2008
I enjoyed this book more than I thought I would. Shaw does a great job in demonstrating Eliza's trastic change and not to mention Higgings. Hinggins, in my opinion is one of the best characters I've seen so far! He is a very complex person in terms of his personality, his emotions and way of thinking. I believe Higgins motives are misenterpret by many. He's one worth to examen at a closer lense. Pygmalion drew my attention through its ending. Shaw does not give us what we want or expect; the protagonists do not end up together, as explained in his sequel. He goes out his way in providing us with a sequel, not a continuation but almost an explanation. Read it to understand what I am saying!
September 29, 2016
Major Barbara is a surprisingly deep meditation on charity, class, and the morality of war profiteering, with a comedy of manners thrown in for good measure. Pygmalion, by far the more adapted and celebrated of the two is a deeply weird play which ends with a long exposition, apparently unspoken by any of the characters. In contrast to a production like My Fair Lady, it is a deeply disturbing tale, with Higgins being an unfeeling monster produced by bourgeois boredom and excess.
May 4, 2008
Shaw had such a specific vision of this story!His stage direction and set description were very detailed.And who writes an epilogue for a play?Did they print the epilogue in the program when the play was performed?If not, how many people did he think would actually read the script?Certainly not near as many as would see the play.
March 14, 2010
This is a pretty good play. It was definately not my favorite play that I have ever read but it was still enjoyable. There are some places that drag on and on but then there are some sections that keep you wanting more.
September 19, 2008
Before My Fair Lady there was Pygmalion!!! I love My Fair Lady, so if you do this book is worth it!
May 2, 2007
Shaw's take in Major Barbara on poverty, the greatest evil we seek to overcome.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews