Please use this thread for all blog posts relating to the 3rd quarter lit circle reading of Pygmalion. Posters in this group are: Cynthia, Sarah, Mikaela, and Nina.
So, yay, Act One! Alright, so, in all honestly, not much seems to happen in this chapter. We do, however, see evidence of the great disparity in wealth evident in England at the time. On one side of the spectrum, there's Eliza, whose English is near-unintelligible; on the other side are such rich men as Henry Higgins, who can tell a person's birthplace from their speech and who apparently has enough spare money to fling it in charity at street girls. From just this scene alone, I think that class will be a major theme of the book, something that is also evident from Higgins' boast that he could pass Eliza off as a duchess if he wanted to. What do you guys think?
I agree. In some ways it seems as though they connect where the characters are from and the way they talk to their social status. At some points when the flower girl was speaking it was difficult to read because of her accent.
Why do you guys think the author decided to put a "sarcastic bystander" into the scene, and how do you think the strange mix of characters will further the plot?
So - onwards to Acts II and III! Throughout this part of the book, one of the things that must struck out to me was Higgin's treatment of Eliza: he is, to be blunt, a total jerk towards her. Whereas Pickering is courteous to Eliza, Higgins doesn't hesitate to bully, insult, and generally push around Eliza. To Higgins, she is dirt - or, to choose a better analogy, clay to be molded into a semblance of a 'lady.' She is an object, not a person, and he takes all the credit for her accomplishments. Contrasted against the attitude of Pickering, Higgins seems an absolutely horrible person. Yet is he? Do Higgins' views reflect the class he was brought up in and do they differ so much from those of Pickering, who also treats Eliza as an 'experiment'? Discuss!
To me it seemed as though even the writer had a negative opinion of Liza, or at least the tone toward her was very negative. An example is when she came to ask for lessons and he compared her offer to more than that of a millionaire and she could not understand the connection and assumed he was going to charge her much more.
Does anyone else feel that Higgins is very misogynistic, especially in the way that he treates Liza? You can tell that he feels superior to all females.
Mikaela - Higgins is definitely misogynistic, but at the same time, he's also kind of condescending to everyone he meets. I think he represents upper-class society in its plainest form, without any mask of genteel manners to cloak the disdain most of the upper class has towards those who are poorer than they are. His misogyny is definitely NOT portrayed in a positive light in this book, though; rather, I think that it serves to highlight the flaws of a highly stratified society such as the one that existed in England at the time.
I feel sorry for liza. Higgins is really rude. I think its ironic that when someone treats him with disrespect he is offended since he treats others the same way.
So I just finished Act IV and thought it a good idea to post something. -_-; Anywho, the whole "class/misogynist" thing is clearly highlighted again when Higgins and Pickering are talking about how the bet is finally over and acting as if Liza isn't there.
On another note, are those romantic feelings I see between the lines? Is it just me or does it seem like Liza enjoys getting a rise out of Higgins for more than the obvious reasons? I understand wanting to tick him off for a sort of revenge, but when she gets on her knees for the ring, it just seems a bit suggestive to me...
That would definitely be an...interesting romance those two would have. It would probably also enjoy why Eliza's so angry at Higgins, who seems to think so little of her.
So...for whoever's read Act 5, I would say congratulations, Sarah, your psychic powers have proven true: they do love each other. Unfortunately, Mikaela's pessimist powers have also proven true: they don't get together. Why do you think this is so? What does it add to the book? Is the epilogue satisfactory or not?
I think that maybe becuase they fail to be open with each other about many important things, they are unable to form an actual relationship. Higgins is especially guilty of this.
I would like to first say HA! I ACTUALLY GOT SOMETHING RIGHT!!
Also, I think that the reason they didn't "get together" is because Higgins has set himself up to be a permanent bachelor. I personally think that in Act V especially, he was acting like a little kid. Was he always like that?
I agree, Sarah. He did act childish and I think that is part of the reason they did not get together. But am I the only one who found the last few pages a little strange?
15 comments:
So, yay, Act One!
Alright, so, in all honestly, not much seems to happen in this chapter. We do, however, see evidence of the great disparity in wealth evident in England at the time. On one side of the spectrum, there's Eliza, whose English is near-unintelligible; on the other side are such rich men as Henry Higgins, who can tell a person's birthplace from their speech and who apparently has enough spare money to fling it in charity at street girls. From just this scene alone, I think that class will be a major theme of the book, something that is also evident from Higgins' boast that he could pass Eliza off as a duchess if he wanted to. What do you guys think?
I agree. In some ways it seems as though they connect where the characters are from and the way they talk to their social status. At some points when the flower girl was speaking it was difficult to read because of her accent.
Why do you guys think the author decided to put a "sarcastic bystander" into the scene, and how do you think the strange mix of characters will further the plot?
So - onwards to Acts II and III!
Throughout this part of the book, one of the things that must struck out to me was Higgin's treatment of Eliza: he is, to be blunt, a total jerk towards her. Whereas Pickering is courteous to Eliza, Higgins doesn't hesitate to bully, insult, and generally push around Eliza. To Higgins, she is dirt - or, to choose a better analogy, clay to be molded into a semblance of a 'lady.' She is an object, not a person, and he takes all the credit for her accomplishments. Contrasted against the attitude of Pickering, Higgins seems an absolutely horrible person. Yet is he? Do Higgins' views reflect the class he was brought up in and do they differ so much from those of Pickering, who also treats Eliza as an 'experiment'? Discuss!
To me it seemed as though even the writer had a negative opinion of Liza, or at least the tone toward her was very negative. An example is when she came to ask for lessons and he compared her offer to more than that of a millionaire and she could not understand the connection and assumed he was going to charge her much more.
Does anyone else feel that Higgins is very misogynistic, especially in the way that he treates Liza? You can tell that he feels superior to all females.
Mikaela - Higgins is definitely misogynistic, but at the same time, he's also kind of condescending to everyone he meets. I think he represents upper-class society in its plainest form, without any mask of genteel manners to cloak the disdain most of the upper class has towards those who are poorer than they are. His misogyny is definitely NOT portrayed in a positive light in this book, though; rather, I think that it serves to highlight the flaws of a highly stratified society such as the one that existed in England at the time.
I feel sorry for liza. Higgins is really rude. I think its ironic that when someone treats him with disrespect he is offended since he treats others the same way.
So I just finished Act IV and thought it a good idea to post something. -_-;
Anywho, the whole "class/misogynist" thing is clearly highlighted again when Higgins and Pickering are talking about how the bet is finally over and acting as if Liza isn't there.
On another note, are those romantic feelings I see between the lines? Is it just me or does it seem like Liza enjoys getting a rise out of Higgins for more than the obvious reasons? I understand wanting to tick him off for a sort of revenge, but when she gets on her knees for the ring, it just seems a bit suggestive to me...
That would definitely be an...interesting romance those two would have. It would probably also enjoy why Eliza's so angry at Higgins, who seems to think so little of her.
So...for whoever's read Act 5, I would say congratulations, Sarah, your psychic powers have proven true: they do love each other. Unfortunately, Mikaela's pessimist powers have also proven true: they don't get together. Why do you think this is so? What does it add to the book? Is the epilogue satisfactory or not?
I think that maybe becuase they fail to be open with each other about many important things, they are unable to form an actual relationship. Higgins is especially guilty of this.
I would like to first say HA! I ACTUALLY GOT SOMETHING RIGHT!!
Also, I think that the reason they didn't "get together" is because Higgins has set himself up to be a permanent bachelor. I personally think that in Act V especially, he was acting like a little kid. Was he always like that?
I agree, Sarah. He did act childish and I think that is part of the reason they did not get together. But am I the only one who found the last few pages a little strange?
Yeah, I would also agree that he acted childish just at the right time that prevented him from properly bonding with Eliza.
Post a Comment