The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    Richard Day's picture

    PYGMALION, A SHAVIAN MASTERPIECE

    Pygmalion  

    Cover-play1913.jpg

    Monday, I viewed the 1938 film version of this play and learned much once again through my laughs and tears.

    Did you know that Shaw wrote the ‘Script & Dialogue’ for this film; winning an Academy Award which he pretended to eschew? I mean, damnation! It was a thoroughly English production after all. For an English film to receive American Awards was rather a big thing in those days.

    Leslie Howard plays my favorite Professor Higgins; one year before he fights for the Confederacy in Gone With the Wind.

    I have no doubt that my second favorite Higgins, Sexy Rexy (who had been on film and stage as much as Howard by 1938) took the trouble to watch Howard before during his musical presentation of the phonetics expert.  The parallels between the two performances cannot just be coincidental.

    Harrison actually starred in the 1941 film adaption of Major Barbara.

    I had just seen My Fair Lady last week and was struck by the way that sets were copied and scenes were staged with the first movie’s take of things.

    And knowing all about the play and the ‘38 presentation makes one giddy over the story of how the musical came about.

    They had to wait till George Bernard was dead before they presented the first stage production of the musical in 1956.. Hahahahaha. The bastard almost lived an entire century and was vehement that his play would never become a musical. Hahhaha

    Too much money involved for the keepers of the decedent’s estate to keep that wish fulfilled I would imagine.

    In My Fair Lady, Pickering is portrayed more like a Watson to a Holmes in the old Sherlock films. More of a what what what kind of speaking by Mr. Wilfrid Hyde-White and I rather prefer his adaption for the part.

    In Pygmalion, Pickering is more commanding and appears more upper class in manner.

    In the 30’s flick, the housekeeper (Mrs. Pearce) is much more demanding and instructing and dictates her orders with a wonderful Scottish brogue. She is just more fun to watch!

    There will never be a better Doolittle than that presented in My Fair Lady; there is something about the timing and posing demonstrated by Stanley Holloway; I don’t know. Of course the two songs presented by Doolittle in the musical are permanently lodged in my mind so that my opinion might be clouded.

    Middle Class morality!

    Now Eliza...

    I loved Audrey Hepburn and I love her back story—her bio; a wonderful woman in all respects even though she seemed to despise food of any sort.

    But Wendy Hiller is superb in this role as Eliza Doolittle in Pygmalion.

    I have always been caught by Hiller's portrayal and since Audrey never really sang in the musical, Wendy wins my award in a landslide.

    Wendy Hiller looks so very young and sensitive and you read her hopes and dreams in her face; really a magical portrayal in all respects. Maybe it has something to do with her beautiful cheek bones! Describing the death of her aunt is always priceless:

    Them that pinched it, done her in!

    Gin was mother’s milk to her.

    Shaw actually picked Wendy Hiller to play this role.

    I am so very touched by the 30’s version anyway because I know that the hands of the godless Shaw are present in every scene. I see HIM in the decors presented on the several stages.

    I apologize but I always have worshipped Shaw since college and always will. He was a scoundrel, a mean eugenics philosopher, an avowed socialist with a totalitarian slant and a man with whom it would be very difficult to discuss a subject. Shaw to some extent represents the devil as presented by beckerhead when you think about it. He just was more into Shaw’s laws rather than Sharia Law. ha

    The man who supped at Stalin’s table. Hahahahaah

    Of course the Brits threw a happy ending into the film; much to the consternation of Mr. Shaw. Hahaha

    We must face the fact that Shaw rarely ever ‘finished’ a play anyway. He usually ended with some drawn out philosophical essay. He certainly has no ending for Pygmalion. He just goes on and on about how Eliza might marry Freddy and operate a flower shop or she might….

    After reading many of his plays, several times, I always read Shaw into the role of Higgins.

    That is seeing in him a man who viewed other people as roles or pawns to be distributed upon the stage as he wished and to defy anyone to challenge his choices. What is really strange to me is that he really wanted Charles Laughton to star as Higgins in the film!

    George was middle class and not upper class as Higgins; the Shaws were Protestant in an occupied Dublin. He barely finished what we would call a high school. He lived with his mother after that receiving  a pound a week while he educated himself at local libraries.

    Schools were a waste of time and teachers merely wardens.

    It is wagered that he never had sex with his wife; eschewing carnal knowledge which is the kind of man Higgins presents without the pretense of marriage. Critics and professionals being human and all, suspect that those men who avoid carnal knowledge with women are homosexuals or priests or both.

    And Shaw was a phonetics nut coming up with his own Shavian Alphabet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shavian_alphabet

    So I guess that is why I see so much of Shaw in Higgins.

    At any rate, these two films must be seen every year, for me anyway.

    And not one gun shot, not one Zombie, not one act of intercourse, not one murder, not one fist fight, not one car chase and not one ad in either one.

    The end

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_Sj9o7DWJU

    (This is written from memory, while watching Pygmalion, using wiki to ‘polish’)

    Previous attempt @ http://tpmaholics.blogspot.com/2011/02/pygmalion.html

    Comments

    As I recall, Rodgers and Hammerstein had tried to adapt the play into a musical and had given up. Lerner and Lowe went instead to the movie and adapted that rather than the play.


    I recall hearing something about that.

    There is no romance in the play and the musical score writers had a hell of a problem grasping how to use their normal talents on this masterpiece.

    Even Lerner and Loewe gave up at first!

    I just recall as a kid loving A Little Bit of Luck!

    Not exactly a tune to be approved by the Comic Code. hahaha


    Never saw it. Now I've gotta.

    Have a buddy, last name Higgins (a teacher) ... runs a site called Hogmalion. I always recognized the allusion, but I never got the entire joke before now. lol.


    You have to take a couple hours and read the play and then watch the '38 version KGB!

    I hate musicals, but My Fair Lady, simply because of Doolittle is well worth it!


    Oh, I've seen My Fair Lady performed. A few times. Even saw an apparently hoity-toity "respectable" version in London once ... and at the other end of the spectrum did ATT for it at our high school when I was a kid (lighting design and follow spot operator). I'm ambivalent about musicals - some I like, some I don't.

    What's the tie in with Pygmalion ... is one a derivative work of the other or do they simply share characters?


    Pygmalion has been around since 1912. Shaw wrote it and it has been staged thousands of times over the last century. All of which you already know.

    If you are referring to the myth, Pygmalion was an artist who who created the most wonderful figure of a woman in sculpture ever produced and fell in love with his own work.

    He called the object Galatea and prayed that the gods would breathe life into her.

    Galatea became mortal and they lived happily ever after.

    Take a look at A Star is Born, a similar metaphor where the scion takes in a nobody and turns her into a star.

    There is a list of operas and such called Pygmalion that you can find in Wiki.

    But Shaw's Pygmalion was Shaw's Pygmalion. Period as they say.

    His wit and punditry astound me. Doolittle. hahahaha.

    I was reading a portion of some essay he wrote--there are only about 250,000 essays and letters written by this devil--positing that every single man should be brought up before some panel and explain why he is worth saving from death. hahaha Like: if you cannot explain your function in this society you should be exterminated.

    And here is Doolittle explaining that he is a member of the undeserving poor; that his needs are still the same as everybody else except for his taste for the grape of course, and Higgins tells him that his philosophy is unassailable. hahahahaha

    Lerner and Loewe saw Doolittle as Falstaff, evidently as I do. If you recall, Falstaff was said to be Elizabeth's I's favorite character. The musical simply added a few scenes and expanded others to include the dance and music. But there is no doubt that the entire concept was taken from Shaw and Shaw alone even though he had already arrived at the place where godless people end up. hahahaah

    Kind of the 'lowest of the low' with bravada and wit and pride. What do I know?

    Shaw's Pygmalion is Shaw's and nobody elses as far as I am concerned written by a product of scores of generations of English writers. And the same should be said of the musical.

    the end

    (P.S. I hope you did not think I was belittling you. I think that you participated in a production is fascinating and wonderful. And this rant of mine--the comment--is your fault. Once I start writing about this play I cannot stop. hahahahaha)

     


    Haven't seen it for many years, but I loved the 1938 Pygmalion and loved Wendy Hiller.  But I have to say, Rex Harrison will always be my Henry Higgins.  Leslie Howard was okay, but Wendy Hiller stole the show, anyway, so it didn't matter.  In MFL, there were three, maybe four memorable performances, but I never bought Audrey Hepburn as a cockney street urchin.  Uh uh.

    I would love to see the Hiller/Howard version again.  I wonder if I would still like it as much?


    Ramona they play the 1938 film on TCM a couple times a year. And of course it would be available on the net for a buck I suppose or through cable.

    And, like I said, I love Audrey's memory; what a life! But she was wrong for the part in my opinion.

    Rex is Rex and only he could have done the musical--even though he could never sing. hahahahah

    But when I compare films, I cannot believe that Rex did not look at Howard's take on things.

    As time goes on, I still think the most memorable character in the play or musical is Doolittle and nobody has ever or will ever outdo MFL's Doolittle. I just love that man. hahahah


    Not at all. I enjoyed and appreciated every word (you actually give me credit for being more well-read than I am in this case). But I'm still not clear on something. So ... My Fair Lady is a musical adaptation of Shaw's Pygmalion?

    I guess I could google it, but it's more rewarding learning from someone who's passionate.


    MFL is based on Shaw's Pygmalion, but it is also much more of a love story. Shaw never intended that Higgins and Doolittle would end up together, and even fought that ending in the film.


    Oh absolutely it is.

    George Bernard Shaw absolutely refused anyone the right to turn his play into a musical because past attempts at other plays were so abominable in his eyes.

    The powers that be had to wait for the sonofabitch to die in 1950 before attempting such a production.

    As our friend pointed out, Rogers and Hammerstein had a stab at it but gave up.

    Learner and Loewe thought, what a great idea and gave up after a couple of years. They came back to the project a few years later and finally completed it in 1956 or so which is the first year it was staged.

    If you listen to the words in the music, every idea comes straight from the rhythyms in Shaw's own dialogue.

    When Rex sings about being accustomed to her face or about being an ordinary man or....

    Shaw lives in the lyrics. I have never read anyone who thinks that Leorner & Loewe were not faithful to the text.

    And the musical incorporates the ending that Shaw hated. hahahahaah

    In my humble opinion, the musical is Shaw or at least Shavian.

    Remember the 38 film WAS WRITTEN BY SHAW. And the musical takes some ideas from the film that do not exist in the play.

    The answer to your question is yes, absolutely!

    And the Musical credits Shaw, a ghost of his former self. hahahaah


    "By law she should be taken out and hung, For the cold-blooded murder of the English tongue."  

    I know a number of lyricists that absolutely cringe at that line.  They argue that being a language expert, Higgins would know that the proper usage should be 'hanged' and not 'hung'.   Theater people can get very nit-picky about this sort of thing.  

    I remember Rex Harrison reprising the role on Broadway late in his life ( early 1980's)  He was so old, the only woman they could get to play his mother was the woman who originated the role in 1956.  At the time, I think she was in her 90's and he was in his 70's. 

    (I'm really showing my inner Broadway geek, aren't I? )

     


    I remember Noel Harrison doing a Pygmalion-like plot in the Girl from U.N.C.L.E.


    Yeah, but this is fun stuff Smith!!!

    Theatre has a culture of its own.

    And English theatre is a subculture of all of this, though its originator. ha

    And I spent 5 years attempting to learn Latin attempting to conjugate my verbs and I still do not understand hung and hanged. ahahahahah

    Today we say: a history. I had learned:an history. That is declensions

    I grew up with the statement: I graduated from H.S. Now it's: I graduated H.S.

    Shaw would win any argument as far as your line.

    He could always hide in some satire: I was being ironical.

    And that is probably why I love Chaucer and Malory and Shakespeare.

    Frankly my dear, none of them gave a damn. They made up their own rules as they went along.

    And as far as playwrites...

    The writers would appear in their own plays and put together shows with anything and anyone available and were out only to bamboozle the public. hahahahaah

    Language changes daily in this day and age.

    Hung sounds perfectly fine as far as I am concerned.

    Noah Webster who used to visit Jefferson while writing his American dictionary, intentionally changed English spelling. ahhaahahahah

    Just to piss them off!!

    I tell ya though Smith, we could split a bottle of good good scotch and have fun for hours. ahahahahah

     


    Indeed.  Reminds me of one of my favorite episodes of Black Adder III, where Black Adder loses Samuel Johnson's dictionary and tries to recreate it overnight.  

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=on9U_tdRIeU