As I read through Pygmalion I found myself growing fonder and fonder of Henry Higgins. His inability to allow room for the feelings of others in his abrasive statements, in my opinion, is not founded in a desire to hurt. It is founded in an inability to be anything other than that which he is... brutally truthful and arrogant. It is also his method of finding other human beings he considers worthy of his time and friendship. He is a man that has no use for weakness of spirit, and it is through his constant belittlement of Eliza that we are actually able to see his love for her. Yes, I said love... His intention morphs over the course of the play from winning a bet to holding on to the thing he loves the most.
In Act I he challenges, not degrades, Eliza to live up to her strong English linguistic heritage. "Remember that you are a human being with a soul and the divine gift of articulate speech: that your native language is the language of Shakespear and Milton and The Bible; and dont sit there crooning like a bilious pigeon." Sure, his reference to a bilious pigeon is a little harsh, but if you look close enough he is asking Eliza (Flower Girl at this point) to acknowledge her own self worth. He is trying to bring her out of her pitiful, weak condition into self confidence and pride.
In Act II he again discloses his good heart in a moment of reassurance to Mrs. Pearce, Pickering, and Eliza, whom he has just offended with his comments. "My dear Mrs Pearce, my dear Pickering, I never had the slightest intention of walking over anyone. All I propose is that we should be kind to this poor girl. We must help her to prepare and fit herself for her new station in life. If I did not express myself clearly it was because I did not wish to hurt her delicacy, or yours." You might say that he makes these remarks simply to keep her there and get his way, but in retort I ask, why would he waste his time teaching her in the first place? If he were truly cruel, he would not only degrade her, but also send her away without training (which she came seeking from him, I might add). Even though it takes disdain from others to motivate the comment, his harshness most commonly comes from his style of humor: blunt truth. I once heard or read (can't remember which) that the true test of a person in England is their ability to give/take a good insult.
In Act V we see Higgins in his most vulnerable state. He is, in his own way, pleading with Eliza to stay on with him at his home. It's as if he wants to tell her he loves her, or even that he loves her company, but he is incapable of this... I'm not sure what personal characteristic keeps him from openly admitting to Eliza that he only has fun when she's with him (pride most likely), but he is unable to do it. In this exchange, he actually tells Eliza that she may do as she wants, just so that she might consider staying on with him. I believe it to be his most vulnerable moment of the play.
LIZA: What am I to come back for?
HIGGINS (bouncing up on his knees on the ottoman and leaning over it to her): For the fun of it. Thats why I took you on.
LIZA (with averted face): And you may throw me out tomorrow if I dont do everything you want me to.
HIGGINS: Yes; and you may walk out tomorrow if I dont do everything you want me to.
It is in the description of the way that Higgins "bounces up on his knees" that I see his love/enjoyment of Eliza. He even empowers Eliza saying that she "may leave if he doesn't do EVERYTHING she wants him to do". I feel sorry for Higgins in this scene, because he is unable to throw away his pride and arrogance and say the thing that Eliza needs to hear the most: that he loves her. If he could have done this, I truly believe that Eliza would have stayed with him. But like life, people are stubborn and sometimes unwilling to change.
Henry Higgins is one of my favorite characters in all of literature, and I do not believe that he is someone who sets out to be a malicious, verbal monster. Why would he spend so much time with common folk, documenting and recording their sounds? He is a lover of sound and of people. It is his bullying and arrogance that are put-ons, and it is his unwillingness to admit he's lonely and kind that cripple him. His roaring laughter is the last sound of the play, and I believe this laughter to be a cover for the great pain and solitude he feels.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Great post, Conrad. You make a really persuasive argument for understanding Higgins in this way, I think. You also show how you, as an actor, have insights that contribute a lot to how an audience understands Higgins' motivations. Not just his body language as written into the script (the "bouncing" you note), but your choice of intention, and how you perform his actions based on your understanding of how his desire changes over the course of the play. (This is, incidentally, why I find sticking with one "superobjective" for the whole play very dull. It doesn't allow for change, which is essential to most plays!)
Another thing to which I would call attention is your acknowledgment that there are cultural differences that affect our understanding of the play. I would compare your understanding of English wit (I also recently heard Rep. Barney Frank point out in an interview that heckling is a regular practice on the floor of Parliament)to our understanding to differences in temprament between the East Coast of the U.S. and the South. What is "rude" or "impolite" to some is almost a sign of respect to others, and it's important to recognize different values.
I also think Higgins' internal conflict could be related to his masculinity: admitting one's feelings is considered "weak" and "unmanly" in a lot of cultures. But regardless of what the root of it is, you point out that it's important to consider the complexities of his psychology when reading the play. People's hearts and minds don't always agree, and what they actually say is not necessarily in agreement with what they really want to say. I guess this is where the nuances of subtext enter into the equation: how much do you let the audience know about Higgins' "real" feelings? When does he slip up? In a glance that Eliza doesn't see? Or does he keep the facade perfect until the very end? Seemingly small choices become much larger when you start recognizing how many possibilities there really are.
Post a Comment