The original Pygmalion is a sculptor who creates a beautiful woman out of clay and is rewarded when she turns human. How does Henry Higgins mold Eliza’s character in much the same way? As Eliza’s creator, does Higgins deserve a certain amount of control over her? Where does his creation end and Eliza’s independence begin? What is the nature of the relationship between artists and their art? Discuss.
Henry Higgins molds Eliza’s character in much the same way as Pygmalion and his statue by transforming her into society’s definition of the perfect woman. In the beginning of the play, Eliza is a lowly flower girl. She’s dirty despite her best efforts, crude in her speech, and almost animalistic in her lifestyle because her life revolves around survival. She retains no semblance of a lady because she has never had the connections nor financial situation to become one. In social terms, she is nothing. Just another one of the deserving poor (as Eliza’s father would say) who can be easily ignored. So in a sense she is only clay; shapeless and unremarkable. This is where Higgins comes in. He takes her from a pauper (clay) to an aristocrat (gleaming statues). He does so by almost completely changing who she is. Firstly, he has her cleaned and tidied. Secondly, he dresses her for the part in expensive clothing. And lastly, he changes her speech and mannerisms so she can fit in with the high class. As a reward, Higgins’ efforts produce a woman who is suddenly beautiful, coveted, and admired. Much like Pygmalion’s statue, Eliza is an object to society before her transformation; the generalized poor rather than an individual. After her transformation and rise in social status, she is suddenly a human being with a name that is worthy of love and respect.
Despite all Higgins’ does for Eliza, I do not believe Higgins deserves any control over her. No human being should be entitled to another. Also, Eliza was her own person before she met Higgins and is therefore not solely his creation. Underneath all his teaching she is fundamentally the same person she was when they first met. The only person who would be entitled to any amount of control over her would be Pickering because he invested the money into her transformation, and even then the control should only be over her financial situation.
Higgins’ creation ends with what he taught Eliza. Eliza’s independence begins when she uses the knowledge bestowed upon her from Higgins for her own endeavors. Higgins teaches Eliza how to act in high society for his own gain. So, up until right after the ambassador’s party Eliza is simply a pawn in a game between Higgins and Pickering. During this time Higgins is forming her into the mannered person he needs her to be and Eliza can’t do much else but listen to Higgins and do what he says. Once her purpose is successfully served for him, however, his creation is as complete as he needs her to be and she must continue on without any direction or purpose but her own. This is where her true independence begins.
The relationship between artists and their art can be very simplistic when the art is material. An artist has a vision that he or she wishes to express so they physically manifest it somehow; whether it be through writing, painting, acting, sculpting, what have you. Once the artist creates their art, it is solely their creation and it can be added upon or left alone or whatever they want to do with it. It does not protest or agree to what it is happening to it because it’s not alive, obviously. In Pygmalion, however, the relationship between art and artist is a lot less simple. Higgins art is a living human being, as I have mentioned before, and therefore is not solely his creation to be tinkered with however he pleases without consequence. His clay was partially formed before he came to it. Eliza had had past experiences and had already formed the core of who she was like her values and personality. So the relationship between artist and art in this situation has a lot more friction than it would normally. There are two opinions at play in it; two people who can agree and disagree and must compromise and work with one another in order to successfully create the art.
Despite all Higgins’ does for Eliza, I do not believe Higgins deserves any control over her. No human being should be entitled to another. Also, Eliza was her own person before she met Higgins and is therefore not solely his creation. Underneath all his teaching she is fundamentally the same person she was when they first met. The only person who would be entitled to any amount of control over her would be Pickering because he invested the money into her transformation, and even then the control should only be over her financial situation.
Higgins’ creation ends with what he taught Eliza. Eliza’s independence begins when she uses the knowledge bestowed upon her from Higgins for her own endeavors. Higgins teaches Eliza how to act in high society for his own gain. So, up until right after the ambassador’s party Eliza is simply a pawn in a game between Higgins and Pickering. During this time Higgins is forming her into the mannered person he needs her to be and Eliza can’t do much else but listen to Higgins and do what he says. Once her purpose is successfully served for him, however, his creation is as complete as he needs her to be and she must continue on without any direction or purpose but her own. This is where her true independence begins.
The relationship between artists and their art can be very simplistic when the art is material. An artist has a vision that he or she wishes to express so they physically manifest it somehow; whether it be through writing, painting, acting, sculpting, what have you. Once the artist creates their art, it is solely their creation and it can be added upon or left alone or whatever they want to do with it. It does not protest or agree to what it is happening to it because it’s not alive, obviously. In Pygmalion, however, the relationship between art and artist is a lot less simple. Higgins art is a living human being, as I have mentioned before, and therefore is not solely his creation to be tinkered with however he pleases without consequence. His clay was partially formed before he came to it. Eliza had had past experiences and had already formed the core of who she was like her values and personality. So the relationship between artist and art in this situation has a lot more friction than it would normally. There are two opinions at play in it; two people who can agree and disagree and must compromise and work with one another in order to successfully create the art.